<p>^also, after he mentioned the world "blowjob" in front of everyone you knew that he would be in trouble...</p>
<p>What really annoys me about this kid is just that he wanted attention, and got it. The First Amendment was NOT betrayed in this situation- you can't just barge into a place where you are not supposed to be and start spewing off political opinions.</p>
<p>But on a really base level... the way he screamed and cried the whole time got on my nerves. I have to mute the TV. He sounds like such a little girl.</p>
<p>
[quote]
<a href="http://www.donttasemebro.com%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5D">www.donttasemebro.com
[/quote]
</a></p>
<p>I lol'd.</p>
<p>I'm actively trying to make that the catchphrase of our generation. Others had "S%^t happens." Others had "Make love, not war." </p>
<p>"Don't Tase me, bro!" seems like a fairly good embodiement of who we are as a generation, culturally, in my opinion.</p>
<p>A friend sent this in an email:</p>
<p>
[quote]
They should not have tased him. There were six officers holding him down. There was more than enough manpower to physically subdue him. Only after he was down did they Tase him. That was to get him to just shut up, not physically incapacitate him, because he was already physically incapacitated. Tasing someone for not shutting up is in fact not right.</p>
<p>What's coloring a lot of people's reactions is the fact that Andrew Meyer, the student, has a history of practical jokes. If we judge the incident by what actually happened, more of us would feel outraged. IF Meyer WASN'T a practical joker, if Meyer HADN'T asked a buddy to film his questions, IF he really was just a regular student who was merely obnoxious but not for the sake of 15 minutes of fame, I believe more people would be supporting Meyer. Only when many people heard about his "history" did they claim he "had it coming."</p>
<p>The police didn't know it was an elaborate practical joke but they tased him anyway. It is just me or is organized, weaponized violence against a lone, UNARMED person to control and punish sound not quite right? Is it just me or is supporting this sort of violence and subjugation and saying "he deserved it" veering into morally clouded waters?</p>
<p>Or is being unarmed but publicly obnoxious acceptable grounds for being physically brutalized these days?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Here is the police report: <a href="http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/09/18/offense.report.072274.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/09/18/offense.report.072274.pdf</a></p>
<p>As you probably know already, I agree with their actions. All most of you saw was the video. There were reasons for what they did, it wasn't about the type of questions he was asking.</p>
<p>I don't see why they tasered him either. Its not like he got any quieter after he got tasered, he was just in pain for like a minute or two. They didn't have to use the taser to kick him out of the room. it didn't make any difference.</p>
<p>And according to the police report, somebody claimed that they read him his miranda rights. I didn't hear it in the video. i'm calling that bs.</p>
<p>"I don't see why they tasered him either." </p>
<p>Tasing is a relatively safe method of temporarily incapacitating subjects to bring them under control; it has been demonstrated many times that it has no long-term effect on the human body (certainly not an adult male). </p>
<p>"And according to the police report, somebody claimed that they read him his miranda rights." </p>
<p>Your rights don't have to be read to you right away, sometimes they're even read in the station. </p>
<p>"There's nothing that bothers me worse than bleeding-heart liberal college students like this kid."</p>
<p>He was a jackass, sure, but where exactly are you getting "bleeding-heart liberal" from? I guess conservative kids never resist arrest?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Tasing is a relatively safe method of temporarily incapacitating subjects to bring them under control
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah but that's the rub: did Andrew Meyer need any more incapacitating? Was he not already under control?</p>
<ol>
<li>Prior to being tased, he was surrounded by five police officers. There was at least one more officer keeping others back from the scene. That totals six people vs. one guy. </li>
<li>Prior to being tased, he was forced down to the floor. He was on his stomach, the five officers pinning his body down. </li>
<li>Prior to being tased, his hands were forced behind his back. </li>
</ol>
<p>All well and good. But how does tasing him make him more physically incapacitated? How is tasing him necessary? All he did was scream more, which really outraged and disturbed many more people than just hauling him out of the auditorium and cuffing him would have. </p>
<p>He just wouldn't stop yelling, which is probably really why they tased him. He was already down, under five other officers. He seemed unarmed-- no knives or guns on him. He would've been unable to reach for one in his pocket anyway, because of the aforementioned manpower. What threat was he besides being loud?</p>
<p>You can't tase someone for being loud and obnoxious. If the cops had to tase him, it should have been while he was pushing and pulling them as they tried to haul him away from the front of the auditorium. Tasing him while he was facedown, hands behind his back was serious overkill.</p>
<p>It was also dumb to do it in front of all those people with cameras.</p>
<p>"You can't tase someone for being loud and obnoxious." </p>
<p>Apparently in this context you can. He was purposefully creating a public disruption and resisting arrest after being warned by authorities. I'd say you can definitely tase under those circumstances.</p>
<p>"If the cops had to tase him, it should have been while he was pushing and pulling them as they tried to haul him away from the front of the auditorium."</p>
<p>The fact the he was pushing a pulling to begin with is suffiient reason to tase him. Mr. Meyer was the one who had bad timing. </p>
<p>"It was also dumb to do it in front of all those people with cameras."</p>
<p>So you think security should only do their job in private settings?</p>
<p>I think the guy "deserved" it, but, I don't think it's the job of the police to give someone what "they deserve". It's the job of the police to enforce the law.</p>
<p>A taser should be used when conventional force can't be used to accomplish the goal. You are telling me that 6 police officers can't put handcuffs on a person?</p>
<p>"But how does tasing him make him more physically incapacitated?"</p>
<p>I thought this was already addressed, but it causes temporary loss of muscle function that quickly wears off, with no long-term damage. It's not like some sort of punishment device that police use on people they don't like to cause them as much pain as possible. </p>
<p>Look, we have two viewpoints here:
a) police officers knowingly and sadistically brutalized somebody beyond necessity, in a room crowded with people and with many cameras rolling, or
b) police officers responded to an incident with what years of training and experience had led them to believe was an appropriate measure, albiet one that may have seemed extreme to people who don't have any training in law enforcement and who don't know of the alternatives. </p>
<p>I choose B for the present, and it will take more than a blurry Youtube video to sway me. I'm no fan of power-tripping authority figures either, but Kent State '07 this is not.</p>
<p>^ Agree. </p>
<p>"dont tase me bro!! ow owow ow owowowowwoow wawaweewa owowowowow!!111111111eleven ow ow ow" </p>
<p>he was just a moron, pest, and threat to public safety. Tasing teached him a lesson as he tried to kick the police officers in the face</p>
<p>Check Out My New Website</p>
<p>Yreason.com</p>
<p>What's the problem with negatively reinforcing someone's wrongful behaviour? He was resisting officers, they could have fought him to get cuffs on, but tasing him should have relaxed his muscles and let them put cuffs on him without any muscles being stretched or arms being bruised. I'd almost say that it was better for them to tase than to use excessive physical force to arrest him. Furthermore, if you are shocked for rsisting arrest, then maybe next time you are arrested, you'll do so peacably. If you are rewarded for behaving badly, you will tend to behave badly, we have to punish people who either break the law, or act in a way that is consistent with breaking the law. If you did nothing wrong, then why resist officers? Let them take you out, question you, and let you go. Resisting officers is illegal and gives them ground to arrest you even if you did nothing else wrong. </p>
<p>As for what else he did wrong, he apparently cut in line, went over the time limit and refused to give up his spot at the podium (you have a first amendment right to speak, but you do not have a right to occupy space that does not belong to you.), as well as using innapropriate language for a professional, political discussion. Then he resisted officers of the law. </p>
<p>Also, in my opinion it is good that officers are being taped in many cases where they arrest people. It does allow us to make a more objective ruling in cases of police brutality, becuase we can watch footage, rather than just listening to personal accounts, which have been shown to be extremely poor evidence.</p>
<p>Oh, and he handed a video camera to an audience member right before he went up and instructed them to tape it. Doesn't <em>legally</em> warrant the tasing, but makes me happier they kicked his ass around a little.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your rights don't have to be read to you right away, sometimes they're even read in the station.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They don't have to be read to you at all, if the officers don't want to officially question you. Gotta love the misconception that you can't be arrested unless read your rights lol.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It does allow us to make a more objective ruling in cases of police brutality, becuase we can watch footage, rather than just listening to personal accounts, which have been shown to be extremely poor evidence.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, Joe Q Public being an expert on use of force law :rolleyes: And if officers' personal statements are such poor evidence, I wonder why they are always called as witnesses in cases or why their reports are basically taken as fact.... very confusing.</p>
<p>As an emergency responder myself, I have to say that armchair quarterbacking by people who don't know what they're talking about is annoying and pointless. Hell, as long as they acted within their policy, we are in no position to criticize them for one simple reason.... WE WEREN'T THERE! </p>
<p>I have a feeling that all of you who are complaining about their actions would be doing the same thing if they just used brute force to cuff and drag him out because they next thing they probably would have gone to in the absence of a taser would be compliance holds/strikes with a baton. At least with a taser, you get involuntary compliance immediately.</p>
<p>Check this out
<a href="http://alligator.org/articles/2007/09/20/news/campus/pranks.txt%5B/url%5D">http://alligator.org/articles/2007/09/20/news/campus/pranks.txt</a></p>
<p>Dude deserved it...He knew he was being disruptive and continued to resist the officers. If anything he's lucky the police were calm and somewhat complacent with his antics. I would've pulled out a baton.</p>
<p>It was a drive stun, not a full tasing so I've read, so it was designed to get him to stop resisting, similar to using pepper spray. Even those his hands were being held behind him, he continued to try to roll over onto his back and gave the officers the impression he was resisting ("GET THE ---- OFF ME"). A drive stun is a great choice in this situation, even better than pepper spray. As for what the taser did for the officers, just look at Meyer's behavior after it was used. Was he resisting?</p>
<p>"it was designed to get him to stop resisting"</p>
<p>Not even that: if you read the police report, it reveals that he was tased on the left shoulder so that his arm would go limp for a second, so that they could put the cuffs on it. The alternative would have been to force his hand in, which would have probably lead to a broken or at least badly bruised arm. The police were actually making the smartest choice they could have made, which makes the fact that people are trying to work a "freedom of speech/police brutality" angle all the more pathetic.</p>