UCPD officers taser ucla student

[jwinslow]

One should take into account how agregious the act had to be for an SC fan to defend a _UCLA student.

 

[Muck]

By carry, I meant cuff, wrestle to the ground, and carry/drag him out.

.../snip/...

There were at least three cops there. If they couldn't physically remove one student from a library, then that is an indictment of their competence to be police officers.

What do you think THAT would have looked like on video?

If they had wrestled him to the ground, cuffed him and physically removed him the critics would be making the same claims...that the video was evidence of police brutality.

They are in a no win situation in these type of encounters.

The reason they do rely so heavily (arguably too much so) on "non lethal" measures like tasers today is directly attributed to the public's reaction to videos of officers trying to subdue combative citizens using the means you describe.

My problem is with the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th use of the taser while he was cuffed. The taser isn't meant to compel a subject to obey an order to stand and walk. It's meant to subdue a threat. If he isn't complying with an order to stand and walk, then drag him out.

Which is a fair enough point. I just tend to place more trust in the judgement of the man who is on the scene than I do hindsight or second guessing from afar...as the latter typically is making judgements based on a lack of pertinent information.


If it was me? Punch the kid in the throat....drag his limp body out of the building while the other two officers provide supressive fire on the crowd...and then call in an arty mission on the building after we withdraw...

That's probably why I have no desire to be a cop.

 

[methomps]

What do you think THAT would have looked like on video?

If they had wrestled him to the ground, cuffed him and physically removed him the critics would be making the same claims...that the video was evidence of police brutality.

They are in a no win situation in these type of encounters.

If this assertion were true, the show Cops would never exist. People get dragged out of places all the time.

Yes, I'm sure you can find someone who would criticize it, but you can find someone who can criticize anything. It doesn't then follow that this criticism is illegitimate.

We could probably find someone who wouldn't object if the cops had gunned him down. Should I then say that invalidates anyone who "supports" the cops in this situation? Of course not.

The reason they do rely so heavily (arguably too much so) on "non lethal" measures like tasers today is directly attributed to the public's reaction to videos of officers trying to subdue combative citizens using the means you describe.

I think there are many reasons for the use of non-lethal measures, and I don't think public reaction to what I described is a primary one. I think they fill the void between situations where suspects can be restrained and where suspects have to be killed.

Which is a fair enough point. I just tend to place more trust in the judgement of the man who is on the scene than I do hindsight or second guessing from afar...as the latter typically is making judgements based on a lack of pertinent information.

That's fine, but it shouldn't preclude the possibility of condemnation.

If it was me? Punch the kid in the throat....drag his limp body out of the building while the other two officers provide supressive fire on the crowd...and then call in an arty mission on the building after we withdraw...

That's probably why I have no desire to be a cop.

Desire might not be the right word.

 

[ekeen]

Example of a kid who has a problem with authority. Win=cops, loser=whiny little brat.

Kid got what he deserved.