…and this is a 
Welcome to an American institution of higher learning
Category: Academics • Evil
Posted on: November 16, 2006 3:24 PM, by PZ Myers
Rob Helpy-Chalk has a horrific video of a student being repeatedly shocked with a taser…for not exiting a UCLA library quickly enough. If you'd rather not listen to a hand-cuffed young man screaming in pain, you could just read the story. There are a few campus police officers who need to be sacked immediately and publicly; there are no excuses for their abuse of power.
Comments
This is the problem with cops and tasers.
Tasers are intended to be used to subdue someone that you would otherwise be shooting with a pistol. It was meant to be a non-lethal alternative to guns, thus lowering the level of violence.
Instead, though, cops are using it in cases where they were not in danger - where they would NOT have used a gun... and so it actually INCREASES the level of violence.
Bottom line is, if the cop tases someone that he would not have shot were he armed with a gun instead, then he has assaulted the person.
This video had me pacing the floor in anger. If I had been there, I believe I would have felt it necessary to defend him from his attackers. I certainly could not have just stood and watched.
I wonder how my court case would have gone?
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 3:40 PM
I wonder how my court case would have gone?
probably quite well. These were "Kampus Kops", after all, yes?
I'd be willing to bet they far exceeded their authority in this matter.
Posted by: Ichthyic | November 16, 2006 3:46 PM
Damn. This has me steaming mad. I wish I was there. I don't understand nobody stopping them. I can't understand people just standing and watching someone be assaulted without stepping in.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 3:50 PM
"I can't understand people just standing and watching someone be assaulted without stepping in."
Apparently the cops threatened to tase anyone who tried to intervene.
Posted by: Dave Munger | November 16, 2006 3:54 PM
Wait. Abusive campus cops at UCLA?
So now we know where the LAPD gets its fresh blood from.
Posted by: Warren | November 16, 2006 3:57 PM
Well, dammit, there you go. It's that song playing again...
Posted by: Joshua | November 16, 2006 3:58 PM
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | November 16, 2006 3:59 PM
Sounds like guy was acting like a HHUUUUUUUGE asshole before he got tazed. Maybe even like a violent fucking dick.
So the cops were supposed to do something gentle like ... tackle him? Guess what: that's assault, too.
Man, nobody dislikes police less than I do. On the other hand, I'm not so fucking stupid to believe that screaming "Don't you fucking touch me" to cops in a public library isn't going to have some serious consequences, including getting tazed or severly bruised when the cop kicks my ass.
The only issue is whether the cops told the guy that if he didn't get the FUCK out of the libary, he was going to get his ass tazed. My guess is that they did tell him.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:00 PM
P.S. I see from the story the cops lied through their teeth about the victim's "resistance"- what a surprise.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | November 16, 2006 4:01 PM
Well, we really have a poor understanding of what led to the tasing, so I'll reserve judgement for the initial shock. Hopefully the result of the investigation becomes available.
However, he was tased multiple times. That's pretty malicious.
Posted by: Miguelito | November 16, 2006 4:02 PM
Whether campus cops are sworn peace officers or not usually depends on the status of the University. Here in Nebraska, (Yes, one of the notches on the Bible Belt) the University is a state sponsored university, so SOME of the officers are actually state law enforcement. Being this was the University of California at Los Angeles, they very well may be state officers.
Posted by: Lance R | November 16, 2006 4:03 PM
GWW, how about acknowledging that neither the video nor the eyewitesses support the cops' claims that he was "acting like an asshole". It's pretty clear to me who the assholes are here.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | November 16, 2006 4:03 PM
"Apparently the cops threatened to tase anyone who tried to intervene."
Well of course. But a taser can only tase one person at a time. And there were many people there.
It's just a matter of waiting for an opening.
Of course, being that I have PTSD so I am hyperreflexive, hypervigilant and stuff like this triggers in me a state of hyperarousal, I react differently to stuff than other people do.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:03 PM
GWW, how about acknowledging that neither the video nor the eyewitesses support the cops' claims that he was "acting like an asshole".
The dude is shouting at the top of his fucking lungs IN A LIBRARY before he gets tazed. That's not "acting like an asshole"? Since when?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:05 PM
I can't view the news link. Is anyone going to prosecute?
Posted by: SEF | November 16, 2006 4:06 PM
The cops tased him repeatedly when he was down for refusing to get up. That simply has to be excessive force, no matter what rulebook you play by.
This is a lot like the Rodney King case, in that a plausible case can be made for using force at first. But once the guy is immobilized--handcuffed according to one witness, although you can't tell from the video, the subsequent attacks are excessive force.
The Rodney King video affected people because it is hard to look at a helpless person being assaulted. In some ways the lead up become moot. We know you shouldn't kick someone when they are down.
Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | November 16, 2006 4:08 PM
The first link (to the video) sends me to the blog entry, "The Evolution of the Female Orgasm". While provocative and interesting, it's not what was promised.
The second link (to the UCLA paper) won't open--and I have a high-speed connection.
Thanks for the tease PZ!!
Posted by: Jason | November 16, 2006 4:09 PM
"The only issue is whether the cops told the guy that if he didn't get the FUCK out of the libary, he was going to get his ass tazed. My guess is that they did tell him."
It doesn't matter. AGAIN - tasers are not supposed to be used on unarmed people. They are intended to be used for self-protection of officers. They are intended as a LESS HARMFUL alternative to bullets, not as a MORE HARMFUL alternative to arm-twisting.
People have the mistaken impression that a taser is supposed to be used along the same lines as handcuffing someone, strong-arming them out the door, or at worst pepper spray.
These people, and you, are simply WRONG.
Tasers are NOT supposed to be used on unarmed people. If in a given situation a cop would not be justified in putting a bullet in someone's head, then they are not justified in tasing them.
Tasers can kill. Using tasers on unarmed people is an escalation of the level of violence cops can get away with. This is totaly the opposite of their intended use.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:10 PM
Yelling "don't touch me" when you haven't done anything wrong, have said (as eyewitnesses attest) that you're leaving, yet are threatened by a uniformed goon with physical force? Nope, that's not acting like an asshole. Using a taser on a harmless person because you're a dickhead cop whose ego is out of control? Now that is being an asshole. Actually, it's being a criminal.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | November 16, 2006 4:10 PM
The dude is shouting at the top of his fucking lungs IN A LIBRARY before he gets tazed. That's not "acting like an asshole"? Since when?
Maybe he was justified in shouting. Maybe not. It doesn't matter.
The cops would not have been justified in shooting him, and therefore were not justified in tasing him.
This is a complete misuse of the weapon. Despite what you and some others think, this is NOT an alternative to zip ties or being dragged out by your feet. It was never intended for that use, and most police guideline prohibit it being used that way.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:14 PM
"Resisting" does not mean failure to immediately do as you're told. It refers to the use of violence to prevent officers from arresting you.
This student was not resisting in any way that I can detect. Forget firing - some people need killing, and that right quick.
We can at least be grateful that those subhumans were merely Campus Police and not the real thing.
Posted by: Caledonian | November 16, 2006 4:15 PM
Youtube link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JGlvEcPmug
Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | November 16, 2006 4:15 PM
"I realize when looking at these kind of arrest tapes that they don't always show the full picture. ... But that six minutes that we can watch just seems like it's a ridiculous amount of force for someone being escorted because they forgot their BruinCard," said Ali Ghandour, a fourth-year anthropology student.
If that isn't a gross disgusting misrepresentation of what happened in that library, I don't know what is.
Has anyone here ever been escorted by police out of a library? I haven't. Here's some advice: if they take you by the arm and escort you out, just shut the fuck up and be happy they are escorting you out and not arresting your ass.
Try to remember the flip side: the cops had no clue who this idiot was or what he was trying to accomplish with his temper tantrum. You can bet your life that if they sat there and watched the guy walk towards the door and then dart to the side, pull out a gun and shoot a few people's brains out, the cops would be getting hell for not doing enough. That is how cops' brains works.
What kind of adult doesn't understand this in 2006? Answer: the kind of adult who is asking to get a tazed.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:16 PM
I suggest that the entire freakin' UCLA administration should resign at once for not immediately firing these sadistic morons.
Posted by: guy in a library | November 16, 2006 4:16 PM
This student was not resisting in any way that I can detect.
And you were there, right?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:17 PM
Maybe he was justified in shouting. Maybe not.
What the hell??? Why would he be justified in shouting? Let's hear your excuse. THis oughta be good.
It doesn't matter.
The cops would not have been justified in shooting him, and therefore were not justified in tasing him.
Where are you coming up with this garbage? Tazer's aren't considered lethal weapons. You may BELIEVE they are but the fact is: they aren't considered lethal weapons.
So get over it.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:19 PM
To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
To a cop with a tazer . . .
Posted by: Stephen Erickson | November 16, 2006 4:20 PM
What kind of adult doesn't understand this in 2006? Answer: the kind of adult who is asking to get a tazed.
you are the one not understanding.
If he went for a weapon, they would be justified in tasing him, just as they would have been justified in shooting him.
You do not shoot someone who is loud and who is making no threatening moves, and you do not tase someone who is making no threatening moves.
You cannot shoot someone because there is a possibility he might be armed, whether its with a gun or a taser. You only can shoot someone when you have reason to believe that they are armed.
The taser is a replacement for a GUN. If use of a gun is not appropriate, use of a taser is not appropriate. Its as simple as that. That is the intended use of the taser, and that is how officers are supposed to be trained to use them.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:23 PM
I haven't looked at the video, but noticed that the young man had a Middle Eastern name. Is it possible that these campus cops were indulging some ethnic prejudices here?
Posted by: Julie Stahlhut | November 16, 2006 4:23 PM
Yelling "don't touch me" when you haven't done anything wrong, have said (as eyewitnesses attest) that you're leaving, yet are threatened by a uniformed goon with physical force? Nope, that's not acting like an asshole.
Geez, you can hear from the cell that Mr. Asshole is doing more than simply yelling once, "Don't touch me." He's throwing a fucking shitfit of insane proportions.
It *is* acting like an asshole. Moreover, it is WRONG to throw a huge shitfit when you aren't allowed to entrance because you don't have an ID.
Do you really believe that this was a simple exchange of
LIBRARIAN: I need your ID.
ASSHOLE: I don't have it.
LIBRARIAN: Then you can't get in.
ASSHOLE: Okay, I'll leave.
COP: You better leave now or we're going to fucking taze your ass (grabs assholes arm).
You think that's what happened? Guess again.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:24 PM
If he went for a weapon, they would be justified in tasing him, just as they would have been justified in shooting him.
According to you? Or according to the law?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:25 PM
If I read the story correctly, the student was *already in* the library when he was "randomly" asked to provide his ID card.
That's a rather different scenario from the hypothetical confrontation with the librarian described above.
Posted by: RedMolly | November 16, 2006 4:26 PM
Okay I'll be the first to say it: the student's name is Mostafa Tabatabainejad. Did the fact that he is Iranian have anything to do with why they chose to stop someone who was alrady on his way out of the library and demand to see his ID? We know the Michelle Malkin and her trolls will bring this up when they start defending the cops who had no way of knowning whether or not Tabatabainejad had an atomic bomb in his back pack that he was planning to detonate at the day care center.
My reading of the news story is that the cops are city of LA cops, not campus cops or security guards.
Posted by: John McKay | November 16, 2006 4:26 PM
This student was not resisting in any way that I can detect.
And you were there, right?
In the video he is clearly down, and they are asking him to get up. He fails to get up, either because he won't or he can't. He is not complying, but this is different than actively resisting. According to a commenter at youtube, police typically use a five level system for judging compliance: "Compliant, Resistant (passive), Resistant (active), Assaultive (physical injury), and Assaultive (serious injury or death)."
The student--his name by the way is Mostafa Tabatabainejad, and that is significant--is in the video either engaged in passive resistence or he is simply stunned. Either way, he is not a threat.
Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | November 16, 2006 4:27 PM
You cannot shoot someone because there is a possibility he might be armed, whether its with a gun or a taser.
According to you, or according to the law?
I think you are simplifying things, my friend. In fact, I know you are. You can shoot unarmed people. And you can taze unarmed people.
So why are you making crap up?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:27 PM
Also: if UCLA police are like the police at UCSC and UC Davis, they *are* "real" police officers, with exactly the same legal position and responsibilities as municipal police. The University campus is a separate jurisdiction from the surrounding city.
Posted by: RedMolly | November 16, 2006 4:28 PM
The "and you were there, right" in my last post should be ital, to indicate that it is the great white troll talking.
Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | November 16, 2006 4:28 PM
So, Great White Wonder, it's perfectly acceptible to taser a person repeatedly for not getting up immediately, when demanded to do so, even though the person is still recovering from being tasered in the first place?
And is it also acceptible for these police officers to threaten innocent bystanders with being tasered, also, simply because some of them tried to beg for mercy on the tasered person, or because some of them wanted to see the police officers' badges?
Posted by: Stanton | November 16, 2006 4:28 PM
What the hell??? Why would he be justified in shouting? Let's hear your excuse. THis oughta be good.
You can't imagine a person being justified in shouting?
I dunno - perhaps be was being accosted? perhaps his rights were being violated? Perhaps he had NO justification.
Shouting is NOT a legitimate reason to shoot someone.
Tasers are NOT classified as non-lethal. they are classified as LESS lethal. They can kill, but it is rare.
The taser was designed and intended to replace guns. They were intended to be used to make sure that a violent person ends up in court instead of the cemetery.
They are NOT supposed to be used on unarmed people. That is the guideline for use in most police departments.
Tasers were introduced to DECREASE the level of violence, not increase it.
Do a little research.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:29 PM
If I read the story correctly, the student was *already in* the library when he was "randomly" asked to provide his ID card.
Geezus have you been on a library on campus? At the libraries I frequented they don't ask for your ID at the door like it's a dance club. They ask for your ID somewhere in the interior.
Are you seriously suggesting that this dude was profiled and asked for his ID? AT UCLA??? That's a laugh.
Before you throw the racist card, please bear in mind that Tehrangeles is NOTHING like Minnesota. You can't throw a sour cherry without hitting a Persian down there. There's probably more Persian cops in LA than the entire state of Minnesota. The idea that this guy was picked out for looking Middle Eastern or some shit like that is totally fucking absurd.
And before anyone throws the fucking racist card at me, I have loads of Iranian relatives, whom I love.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:33 PM
Sorry, craig is right, and you're a dick. Everything up to the tazing is irrelevant. Using a tazer was excessive force for the situation, plain and simple. The kid was causing a disruption, but big deal. Grab him and take him out. Tackle him. Whatever. Unless he is fighting back or threatening to injure someone, there is no justification for the use of a tazer.
The British are definitely on to something. For all the situations that having a weapon defuses something ugly, you get ten or twenty like this where the cop skips all the intermediate steps of the engagement and whips out the weapon just because he can. It's a gross abuse of authority.
Posted by: Joshua | November 16, 2006 4:35 PM
"Over a recent five-year period, at least 148 people have died in the U.S. and Canada after being shocked with Tasers by police. In 2005 alone, there were 77 deaths in incidents involving the use of Tasers. Fifteen of these were in Northern and Central California. In the San Jose area, 3 people have died in such incidents."
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:36 PM
Tasers are NOT classified as non-lethal. they are classified as LESS lethal. They can kill, but it is rare.
according the article, 148 people have been killed by tasers since 1999 in the US and Canada.
also of note in this case, is that when asked for badge information by a student, in a non-threatening manner, one of the "Kops" responded by threatening to taser the student who asked.
according to the article (was news to me, and I live here) that's considered assault in CA , and a very big NO-NO for a cop to threaten violence when asked for his badge number.
yeah, there were definetly some issues here that bear futher investigation.
Posted by: Ichthyic | November 16, 2006 4:36 PM
You can clearly see in the video that the guy is handcuffed, with his hands behind his back, when two officers put their hands under his arms and drag him away. You also seem him tasered, screaming and arching backward, with his hands still behind his back.
In my day, librarians would "shhhh" you for screaming in the library, not taser you.
Posted by: PZ Myers | November 16, 2006 4:36 PM
We're not throwing the "racist card" at you.
We're just coming to the conclusion that you think it's perfectly acceptable for police officers to brutalize and possibly kill anyone they deem a threat, whether they really are a threat or not.
Posted by: Stanton | November 16, 2006 4:36 PM
craig
The taser was designed and intended to replace guns. They were intended to be used to make sure that a violent person ends up in court instead of the cemetery.
Interesting that you refused to answer my direct questions to you. Fine. Not unexpected.
Guess what: nobody ended up in a cemetary in this case. Some asshole got tazed and some students in a library were upset by his boo-hoo-hooing.
Again: what the fuck happened before this asshole was tazed the first time?
Nobody really wants to talk about that. I've heard some pleasing stories about how the asshole in question was profiled and made to leave "against his rights" but strangely those stories appear to contradict common sense and the undeniable facts which we can hear on the video itself: this dickhead was throwing a gigantic hissyfit that compelled at least one person to fire up his cell phone camera.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:39 PM
"Tehrangeles"
...
Oh, that's about the end of this conversation now. I don't need to be arguing with bigotted morons.
Posted by: Joshua | November 16, 2006 4:40 PM
whenever anything remotely like this happens, the 'net response tends to break down predictably into two recognizable, fairly stable camps, as demonstrated above.
some people deplore the violence on the part of the officials, and in the absence of evidence otherwise, tend to assume it was unwarranted. others (and on average, i would judge this group to be somewhat smaller) tend to give officials (police officers, whatever) every conceivable benefit of the doubt, and appear to assume that whatever they did was warranted unless proven otherwise beyond every reasonable doubt.
the second group appear (in my subjective estimation) to usually apply a much stricter standard of evidence than the first one. there seem to be comparatively fewer people who will never believe a peace officer's actions to be warranted than there are ones who will always believe an officer's actions to be justified no matter what.
we weren't there, as has been repeatedly pointed out, and even cameras only show a single point of view on a complex set of events, usually without any of the context needed to make a good judgement. stories like these need -- and deserve -- to be examined in courts of law, or at very least before grand juries; there, the appropriate context and opposing viewpoints can be brought forward.
Posted by: Nomen Nescio | November 16, 2006 4:40 PM
Everything up to the tazing is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant for determining whether this guy deserved to be tazed the first time, which is what I'm talking about.
Did he deserved to be tazed the 4th time? I don't know.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:42 PM
"Tehrangeles"
Now we can play the race card.
Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | November 16, 2006 4:42 PM
RedMolly: Almost correct. In CA, the UC police are state level police. the various campuses are not municipalites, but part of the State of California.
Posted by: John M. Price | November 16, 2006 4:42 PM
Goodbye Great White Wonder--thank you killfile :-) Peace at last, Halleluia, peace at last.
Posted by: AlanW | November 16, 2006 4:43 PM
All I know is the boys at UCLA are a bunch of pussies. You stand there listening to that guy scream in pain like that and your response is "I demand your badge number!" Jesus, what a bunch of pussies. In my college days with my buddies, those cops would have been lucky to get out of the building in one piece.
And Great White Wonder, you're a pussy too. If I want to yell at a cop to get his fucking hands off me, I'll yell as loud as I feel. It's still a free fucking country. Although when I see how these little sissy twerps at UCLA cower in the face of petty authority, I can believe it won't be for much longer.
Posted by: Max Udargo | November 16, 2006 4:43 PM
this reminds me of a case a few years back (I think it was in Humboldt county?) where folks protesting illegal logging were doing a sit-in in the mayor's office lobby, and the cops, after telling them to leave, swabbed (yes, swabbed) their eyes with pepper spray.
yikes.
Posted by: Ichthyic | November 16, 2006 4:43 PM
You said they are non-lethal. You were wrong.
Tasers can kill. You do NOT attack someone with a potentially deadly weapon because they shouted in the library or threw a gigantic hissyfit.
You do not attack someone with a potentially deadly weapon when they are handcuffed and laying on the floor.
I realize that its ok with YOU if someone gets attacked with a potentially deadly weapon for shouting in a library, but that's simply because you are wrong.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:44 PM
OK, even if the guy was an asshole that still isn't justification to use possibly lethal force. Nationally there have been 69 deaths from tasers since 2000.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/201827_taser01.html
Now imagine for a second that you're a student in a library and you forgot your card. Some guy asks you to leave even though you're paying money to go to this school. You refuse thinking maybe he'll just go away, in your mind he's being the asshole. Then the cops show up and start trying to pick you up and make you leave. You have a thing against physical contact and people violating your personal space (rememeber, in your mind all you have done is forgot a studnet ID card). You yell for them to stop, and the cops use an incapacitating, extremely painful, and possibly lethal weapon because you verbally said something?
BS... that is over the line. But thats not whats so bad. I wasn't there, maybe he was a lot more actively resistant. But there is absolutley no excuse for tasering him when he is handcuffed, and certainly criminal charges shoud be brought against the police officers for threatening another student when they ask for the badge number.
These "cops" crossed the line, and should not be cops, and should be faced with assault charges.
Posted by: Robert | November 16, 2006 4:45 PM
Nor at the campus libraries I've been to. The only time I've had to show an ID other than when checking out books was when applying for admission to the medieval manuscripts collection at Cal's Bancroft Library.
And I think that's about enough of responding to you.
Posted by: RedMolly | November 16, 2006 4:46 PM
Again, to the folks wasting their time trying to prove that tazers are "lethal weapons" by citing incidences of people being killed by them: spare me. That game is too easy to play.
My point is that cops carry -- and are allowed to carry -- tazers and guns, for different reasons. There are good reasons for this. You may not like the reasons. You may not like the conclusion. But for the time being, you're out of luck. Same deal with pepper spray.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:47 PM
Instead of complying with a perfectly reasonable policy like everyone else, the shithead chose to be belligerent and demand special treatment; he earned his tazering.
This is my last response to your type.
Being attacked with a potentially deadly weapon for not complying with library policy is NOT justifiable. It does NOT earn you a tasering.
The fact that YOU think being attacked with a potentially deadly weapon while handcuffed because you didn't comply with a policy is ok only reveals a serious flaw in your character.
Posted by: craig | November 16, 2006 4:49 PM
we weren't there, as has been repeatedly pointed out, and even cameras only show a single point of view on a complex set of events, usually without any of the context needed to make a good judgement. stories like these need -- and deserve -- to be examined in courts of law, or at very least before grand juries; there, the appropriate context and opposing viewpoints can be brought forward.
sorry, but there clearly were documented instances of legal violations on the part of these officers. Take the threats of tasering when asked for badge number, for one.
that certainly suggests there is something worth investigating here, and lends credence to those who think the officers were way out of line here.
Posted by: Ichthyic | November 16, 2006 4:50 PM
First of all, the University of California Police Department (UCPD) is its own police department that operates at all of the University of California campuses. They're real police officers, not rent-a-cops; if I understand correctly, they exist so that local police departments don't have to patrol UC campuses.
Second of all, these police vastly overreached their authority. It doesn't matter if the guy was yelling, doing jumping jacks, or whatever in the library. The fact that he was repeatedly tased while (as others have pointed out) still recovering from his initial shocks shows that this is nothing short of police brutality. Great White Wonder, did you read the article? It says:
But according to a study published in the Lancet Medical Journal in 2001, a charge of three to five seconds can result in immobilization for five to 15 minutes, which would mean that Tabatabainejad could have been physically unable to stand when the officers demanded that he do so.
What in the world is legitimate about shooting someone with a taser while he's still incapacitated from your previous shot? And all this over not leaving a library quickly enough? He was walking to the door when he was assaulted by the police. He was obeying their orders, just not fast enough to satisfy the bully with a badge. That is seriously fucked up.
Posted by: The Disgruntled Chemist | November 16, 2006 4:50 PM
Max Udargo, Great White Wonder, and Lebesgue-Stieltjes Integral should meet in the non-virtual world and settle their differences with a cock-off.
Posted by: Stephen Erickson | November 16, 2006 4:50 PM
Thanks, John, for the clarification--I knew UC police had a central organization system, but didn't know they were technically state police. Duly noted for future reference.
Posted by: RedMolly | November 16, 2006 4:51 PM
this dickhead was throwing a gigantic hissyfit that compelled at least one person to fire up his cell phone camera.
So yelling is now totally appropriate grounds for the police to use violence against you. Neat! I think I'll go get a badge so I can beat up all people who ever engage in non-violent protest.
All sources point to that having been the only thing this guy did. The police tried to oust him from the library for not having his student card on him (or refusing to show it) and he protested loudly, but not violently. Then the cops did the 21st-century equivalent of turning a fire hose on him.
Posted by: Allison | November 16, 2006 4:51 PM
The reasons cops carry tasers, and the reason they used them in the story aren't the same reasons. Thats the whole point. And if a weapon can kill, then it is a possibly lethal weapon. Amenesty International is currently trying to get taser use restricted because fo that point.
But this is all secondary to what we are trying to get you to recognize. The first tasering isn't the violation, its the repeated use of it on an incapacitated man thats wholly inappropriate.
SO defend that. You are just erecting strawmen arguments so far. I have yet to see you actually put up a point that deals with anything after the first use of the taser.
Posted by: Robert | November 16, 2006 4:53 PM
Max Udargo, Great White Wonder, and Lebesgue-Stieltjes Integral should meet in the non-virtual world and settle their differences with a cock-off.
I'd win. And Great White Wonder could bring an army of UCLA students and I'd still win.
The sickest thing about that video was the impotent reaction of the witnesses. It's just a disgrace.
Posted by: Max Udargo | November 16, 2006 4:54 PM
The only time I've had to show an ID other than when checking out books was when applying for admission to the medieval manuscripts collection at Cal's Bancroft Library.
Time's have changed, then, because last time I checked you needed a pass through a monitored turnstyle to get into the collections at many of Cal's libraries.
In fact, two seconds of Google searching reveals that this remains the case: "The public is welcome to attend these classes [in the library] but must sign-in with Moffitt entrance security monitor. UC Berkeley students, faculty and staff must show campus ID."
What's the deal RedMolly? You aren't trying to bullshit all of us are you?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:54 PM
I never have to show my student ID to get into the libraries at UC Irvine. So, what's the deal GWW? You're not trying to bullshit all of us, are you?
Posted by: The Disgruntled Chemist | November 16, 2006 4:57 PM
From my experiences, this is what I imagined happened. It happens all the time across University campuses.
Student is doing something he/she should not be. (In this case in a library after hours without ID.) It can be anything.
Worker at said locale -- doing his or her job -- asks the person to stop doing what it is they are doing. In this case, they were asked to leave.
The perpetrator refuses. They could be beligerent. Say things like "I pay fees! I pay tuition! I have a right to be here!" Nevertheless, they are in violation of the rules.
Worker who asks the perpetrator to leave threatens to call the police.
Perpetrator continues to refuse to play by the rules.
Cops arrive. Perpetrator is still beligerent. Still believes he/she has a right to continue to do what they were doing.
Cops do whatever they do.
Thus, the video and the newspaper story are only a small part of the interaction that this student had with library authorities and police. Did the cops use excessive force? Probably. Should the person have left when asked? Definitely.
There are probably signs all over that library that state you must have ID after 11:30pm. This student could have avoided EVERYTHING if he would have just left when asked. This is what is going to prevent the cops from losing their jobs. This is what is going to prevent him from getting anything from any lawsuit. This would have been a non-starter if he would have just followed the posted rules.
Posted by: DouglasG | November 16, 2006 4:57 PM
So yelling is now totally appropriate grounds for the police to use violence against you.
I love how people erect strawmen when they can find nothing intelligent to say in response to what I've actually written.
Folks, as I said in my first post, I hate cops. Really, they bug the living shit out of me.
But as bad as they are, I do appreciate it when they around to take care of assholes who think the world revolves around them. Like that asshole in the UCLA library.
I'm sorry he get tazed too many times for y'all. But you'll just have to excuse me if I don't join you in creating a Magnificent Lie around the entire affair, in which the police officers in question are racist sadists who prowl libraries looking for Middle Easterners to harass.
That's fucking pathetic.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 4:58 PM
i was attempting to speak in the general, not make a comment about this particular incident; my apologies for being unclear about that. i agree with your point about this being worth investigating -- and i'd be much happier if that was done by the justice system; police departments' "internal investigations" tend to underwhelm me, as that fox just shouldn't be cleaning that hen house.
Posted by: Nomen Nescio | November 16, 2006 4:59 PM
I never have to show my student ID to get into the libraries at UC Irvine. So, what's the deal GWW? You're not trying to bullshit all of us, are you?
No, I'm trying to address RedMolly's comment which directly contradicts my own experience at Cal and which also -- quite obviously -- ignores the basic fact that UCLA does require ID to access at least some of their collections. Nobody gives a crap about UC Irvine's library in any event.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 5:01 PM
According to the article linked, he was already leaving when the police arrived.
The same would be true if the cops had, say, shot him dead. What he did is not the issue. To those of us who are not out of our fucking minds, at any rate.
Posted by: MartinM | November 16, 2006 5:01 PM
No ID is needed at the PSU campus libraries. Not to enter, not to examine the books (although I believe proof of identity and possibly university status is required to access some of the special collections), not to use the facilities. You can't use the special computer lab without a university PIN, and you can't check anything out without the right ID, of course.
Posted by: Caledonian | November 16, 2006 5:02 PM
Ok, after finally being able to watch the video, my take is that this student was being a belligerent, obnoxious asshole, screaming about "Patriot Act", "justice", and using a lot of profanity.
And even though he kept screaming "I said I would leave", when the cops told him to get up, he just laid there.
IOW, "I'll leave"
"Ok, get up."
"No."
"Get up."
"No."
"You'll be tasered."
"I said I would leave."
However, with all that said, from what I saw of the video there was no reason at all to taser the guy. He was already handcuffed, he wasn't fighting, kicking, or spitting, he was just "going limp'.
So why didn't the cops just put thier arms under his armpits and drag his idiotic ass out of the library? What stopped them from doing that, and made them go immediately to the taser?
Yes, the guy was an annoying, obnoxious dickhead who wasn't doing what the cops were telling him to do. But I saw nothing that justified the use of a taser.
Posted by: Jason | November 16, 2006 5:04 PM
I don't need ID to enter the Berkeley Public Library.
Just thought I'd say that. Why? I have no idea. It's not relevant but some people seem to think such facts are relevant.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 5:06 PM
I was shocked enough that this would happen in a university library, but far more shocked that someone on this site would defend the police's grossly excessive use of force. I'm sure that on FreeRepublic, where they reflexively hate anyone connected with higher education, or indeed anyone with an IQ in triple digits, they're cheering the cops on, but surely not here.
Posted by: Gerard Harbison | November 16, 2006 5:08 PM
So why didn't the cops just put thier arms under his armpits and drag his idiotic ass out of the library? What stopped them from doing that, and made them go immediately to the taser?
I'll tell you what: the guy was so fucking belligerant and agitated that the cops were afraid that he'd gouge their eyeballs out or worse if they tried to accost him. So according to the own training procedures, they tazed him.
Sure, they could have pepper sprayed him but then they risk getting some of that crap in their own eyes! Ouch!!!!
Better just to go with that nice clean electricity.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 5:10 PM
But you'll just have to excuse me if I don't join you in creating a Magnificent Lie around the entire affair, in which the police officers in question are racist sadists who prowl libraries looking for Middle Easterners to harass.
Oh holy shit, GWW, talk about strawmen. Where in my comment did I say a single word about race or racial profiling?
Posted by: Allison | November 16, 2006 5:10 PM
I'm sure that on FreeRepublic, where they reflexively hate anyone connected with higher education, or indeed anyone with an IQ in triple digits, they're cheering the cops on, but surely not here.
Who's cheering on the cops? Nobody.
So much for "reflexive" behavior.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 5:11 PM
Yes, the guy was an annoying, obnoxious dickhead who wasn't doing what the cops were telling him to do. But I saw nothing that justified the use of a taser.
You and others are assuming this guy was being treated fairly up to that point and he had no reason to be angry. If I understand what was happening when the video began, he was already making his way toward the exit when one of the cops grabbed him and he started shouting.
Why are you so sure he didn't have a reason by that point to feel harrassed and to be angry? Does the subsequent behavior of the cops indicate to you that they are rational, reasonable people with a good sense of what's appropriate?
And if you were a Middle Easterner who finds himself being tasered in a library over a dispute about an ID, you might think of the Patriot Act also.
And read the linked article. His "going limp" was probably the result of being tased.
Posted by: Max Udargo | November 16, 2006 5:12 PM
Oh holy shit, GWW, talk about strawmen. Where in my comment did I say a single word about race or racial profiling?
Oh holy shit, Allison, where did I mention your name?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | November 16, 2006 5:12 PM
this would even make sense, were it not for the reports that they had by this point already managed to handcuff him. one wonders how, without accosting him in the doing.
Posted by: Nomen Nescio | November 16, 2006 5:13 PM
The only one erecting strawmen is you GWW. No one has called the cops racist, and the main point is the repeated tasering of the man after is obvious that he is of no threat.
The only magnificent lie is the one you've wrapped yourself