<p>i appreciate answers to "was it right or wrong," which is debateable either way. but let's try to keep focus "where are they now" thanks</p>
<p>
[quote]
I never said the student wasn't guilty. I'm saying that that kind of use of brute force is simply unacceptable on an unarmed student. Were they afraid that he was going to bludgeon them with a flash drive? Please.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And how else should get the student to comply? He obviously wasn't ready to just walk out. </p>
<p>
[quote]
What the hell is that, there are students getting robbed on campus and they worry about people rioting?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>chaoses,</p>
<p>And what happens if there is a riot? Sports events have been known to lead to them, after all...</p>
<p>
[quote]
i appreciate answers to "was it right or wrong," which is debateable either way. but let's try to keep focus "where are they now" thanks
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Best I can tell, that's already been answered...</p>
<p>er he WAS walking out until the campus police grabbed my arm. Lucky they didn't grab my arm, because I would have punched them in the face and called self defense. I don't care if they have authority, people WITH authority need to watch their behavior MORE than people without it.</p>
<p>No, he was not. He had gone limp and had begun to resist the arrest, calling for students to join him in his little coup. </p>
<p>If you had punched the officer, you'd now be in jail for committing felony assault against a police officer. THINK BEFORE YOU ACT.</p>
<p>And yes, I agree with your last statement. And I do agree that the officer in question used too much force. It doesn't change the fact that the student should remain culpable for his part of the deal.</p>
<p>
[quote]
because I would have punched them in the face and called self defense.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>haha suuuure you would have :rolleyes: I'm sure you would've called it discrimination when they then introduced your face to the pavement and your center mass to the business end of several guns. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm saying that that kind of use of brute force is simply unacceptable on an unarmed student.
[/quote]
[quote]
he WAS walking out until the campus police grabbed my arm.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>once again, proof of a complete ignorance of the situation. Even if he was leaving, it doesn't mean that the police aren't allowed to stop him and talk to him. He had displayed suspicious activity by refusing to show his ID after several requests. He then had at least 5-10 minutes to leave before the police actually got there. But only when the police show up does he decide to start walking out. That alone is reason to stop someone. And when he started resisting, the police acted within their rights and policy.</p>
<p>You are all speaking with the gift of hindsight. We know now that he was unarmed and is actually a student. At that point, there was no proof that he had a legal right to be where he was (duh, thats the whole reason for this thing), and there was also no proof that he was unarmed (he hadn't been placed under arrest or searched). For the police to react as they did was totally justified.</p>
<p>Arg :(:(</p>
<p>so the case has been dropped then? or what exactly is going on now with it?</p>
<p>
[quote]
For the police to react as they did was totally justified.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes...and no. Of all the depts. that issue tasers to officers, only UCLA shows a willingness to allow the use of drive stun so liberally.</p>
<p>MNKeeper,</p>
<p>No, he's now suing under the Americans with Disabilities Act...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes...and no. Of all the depts. that issue tasers to officers, only UCLA shows a willingness to allow the use of drive stun so liberally.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>yes, but being in the minority does not make it wrong - and the fact remains that they were acting within policy</p>
<p>Life lesson...don't mess with the police</p>
<p>(or else you'll end up famous on youtube for crying)</p>