"Don't tase me, bro"

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
What freedom of speech? One's rights end when it intrudes on others. His intention was to disrupt the assembly and even he admitted to that, therefore his rights (to free speech) ended.

I am certainly no expert on appropriate use of force in such circumstances. Being who I am, I tend to err on a little too much force rather than too little. There have to be consequences for actions. When did people come the conclusion that there should be no real consequences for violating others rights and refusing to obey police orders?

Those officers aren't his "bro", they represent the authority of the government (though if I remember correctly they were campus security). By saying that, he thinks he is their equal. That is the height of egalitarian arrogance.

Less than a minute to go, and the Vols have the ball again, so I'll jump in again


The forum was a dialog between Kerry, the candidate, and the audience ... Kerry had asked they not restrain him, whatever his intent was, and was ready to respond to his questions, a member of the audience, again whatever his intent, and more importantly, as a citizen, his questions articulated what issues the larger citizenry may have harbored... I therefore find it difficult to see how anyone's rights, other than his, may have been violated ... again the issue was one of decorum

The attitude that the government should somehow be revered as being on a higher level than either you or me is very disturbing, and represents the very thing that disturbs me most about these incidents and the reactions to them: an acceptance of the erosion of civil liberties and a slide of sensibility to acceptance of fascist actions, coupled with political correctness, the enabling ideology of globalism, indicates an abandonment of the ideals that founded the nation
 

RamIt

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Posts
293
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
163
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Tasing some punk college kid who admitted he wanted to be disruptive, and then became violent, demonstrates fascism to you?
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
the increasing tend to use tazing by the police (this is not the only incident);

the increasing indifference to these incidents, or worse, acceptance by the citizenry;

other actions, having nothing to do with tasing (eg., confiscation without due process)
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
This is not a freedom of speech issue. The right to freedom of expression only applies to government restrictions. This took place in a private venue which had rules of conduct and an apparent agenda. This is no different than if you wrote an inflammatory letter to a newspaper using language that the editor found objectionable. The editor is free to print the letter or not print the letter as he sees fit. Not printing the letter is not a violation of the Constitution.

As for the security guards, they are merely employees and not part of the executive branch of the government. Just like any local tavern, the bouncers are free to eject whoever they want to with no violation of the Constitution.

I still don't agree with the use of excessive force, and I think the security guards were out of control, but I also think I don't know enough about the whole situation to have a strong opinion. It just looked excessive to me from what is shown on the video.
 

B_henry miller

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Posts
2,917
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
193
Location
Big Sur, California
Gender
Male
Okay, well. I'll go get a taser, and you e-mail me your address. How about we get together and I tase you, since you are such fan of it.

Tasing is a tool to be used above soft compliance techniques and before higher levels of force. It only hurts while its on, hurts like a motherfucker, but it goes away. It also provides excellent results without bodily harm.

Dont want the chair? Do what the man says. Simple.
 

B_henry miller

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Posts
2,917
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
193
Location
Big Sur, California
Gender
Male
You can have all the rules of conduct you like in a private venue, but that doesn't make it okay to torture people. Many crimes are committed in private homes, rape, murder, etc., and that doesn't nullify that it's illegal. There was no need to tase him. He was being held in place by about four or five officers. It was excessive.

This is not a freedom of speech issue. The right to freedom of expression only applies to government restrictions. This took place in a private venue which had rules of conduct and an apparent agenda.
 

ManlyBanisters

Sexy Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Posts
12,253
Media
0
Likes
58
Points
183
Okay, well. I'll go get a taser, and you e-mail me your address. How about we get together and I tase you, since you are such fan of it.

pixplzkthx

That's hardly a violent act. Further, Kerry wanted to answer, and the police interrupted. You're so on ignore, you fascist.

That's going to make it kind of difficult for him to get his address to you - and I was kind of interested in the 'experiment' :rolleyes:
 

RamIt

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Posts
293
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
163
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Been there, done that. Its a wild ride, pain beyond pain, but a real rush when its done.

Tasing takes the place of deadly force, and improves compliance rates. The fear alone of the chair on the street makes things better for LEOs.

Tasing has saved countless lives, both officer and civilian. Pain is temporary, dead is forever.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
RE QUOTE: This is not a freedom of speech issue. The right to freedom of expression only applies to government restrictions. This took place in a private venue which had rules of conduct and an apparent agenda. This is no different than if you wrote an inflammatory letter to a newspaper using language that the editor found objectionable. The editor is free to print the letter or not print the letter as he sees fit. Not printing the letter is not a violation of the Constitution.

As for the security guards, they are merely employees and not part of the executive branch of the government. Just like any local tavern, the bouncers are free to eject whoever they want to with no violation of the Constitution.

***************************************************

Just out of curiosity:

It was a political candidate for national office, it was a question and answer session with citizens in the audience, on the grounds of a State chartered institution; But it raises this question: Does the fact that it might be held on private property circumscribe free speech rights (other than the decorum issue)?

As far as the security guards (the article describes them as police) , they were acting, as is said in legalese, under color of law. But, are you saying that would change the issue, if they were security guards, not police?

Again, just curious about your reasoning.
 

RamIt

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Posts
293
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
163
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
That's hardly a violent act. Further, Kerry wanted to answer, and the police interrupted. You're so on ignore, you fascist.

What does and does not constitute a violent act is not a matter of opinion(let alone yours), its the law.
 

B_henry miller

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Posts
2,917
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
193
Location
Big Sur, California
Gender
Male
Okay, this thread is going to spiral out of control, apparently. It's really frightening and discusting that some assholes on this thread support the torture of a young man who has the audacity to do what we are supposed to do in a democracy: get involved. Further, he was putting questions to a man who, if he had been elected, may have been able to prevent the deaths of thousands.

The only real transgression was questioning authority and perhaps being a bit annoying, WHICH IS WHAT YOUNG PEOPLE AT UNIVERSITIES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. I suppose he's just lucky he didn't get shot, like the boy in that famous picture from the 1960s.

Anyone who thinks this boy deserved to be tasered is a total asshole. Fuck you!

This thread made me realize that the reason the statement "Don't tase me bro" is so god-damned adorable is because the statement itself contains no malice, but rather a type of brotherly cameraderie -- which is the last thing most of you motherfuckers who say he deserved it would have expressed if you were being held in place by five bigs! Most people being held in place like that and who thought they were about to be tasered would be cursing the police, not calling them "bro."

And some of you wonder why this country has a bad reputation internationally. It's because images like this get out there. This is supposed to be the world's greatest democracy, and the reward for practicing democracy sometimes is that scrawny college boys get tackled to the ground and tortured. Meanwhile, the government system the boy was questioning is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands in Iraq, a war that shouldn't have happened and is terrorism anyway.
 

B_Italian1

Experimental Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Posts
1,661
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
183
Location
United Steaks
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Just like every woman who rapes it was asking for it because she was so pretty, right? She really wanted it. You know she did.

No, a woman does not deserve to be raped under any circumstances. He was a disruptive pain in the ass and deserved what he got. He will probably become very wealthy.
 

B_Monster

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2005
Posts
4,508
Media
0
Likes
45
Points
183
Age
43
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
No, a woman does not deserve to be raped under any circumstances. He was a disruptive pain in the ass and deserved what he got. He will probably become very wealthy.


And that was his point,to get noticed and get fame, end of story. End of thread hopefully. I hate tasers, to crude and cruel.

Whats with the "chair" ramIt, was he gonna get the chair as opposed to the taser???
 

RamIt

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Posts
293
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
163
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Okay, this thread is going to spiral out of control, apparently. It's really frightening and discusting that some assholes on this thread support the torture of a young man who has the audacity to do what we are supposed to do in a democracy: get involved. Further, he was putting questions to a man who, if he had been elected, may have been able to prevent the deaths of thousands.

The only real transgression was questioning authority and perhaps being a bit annoying, WHICH IS WHAT YOUNG PEOPLE AT UNIVERSITIES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. I suppose he's just lucky he didn't get shot, like the boy in that famous picture from the 1960s.

Anyone who thinks this boy deserved to be tasered is a total asshole. Fuck you!

This thread made me realize that the reason the statement "Don't tase me bro" is so god-damned adorable is because the statement itself contains no malice, but rather a type of brotherly cameraderie -- which is the last thing most of you motherfuckers who say he deserved it would have expressed if you were being held in place by five bigs! Most people being held in place like that and who thought they were about to be tasered would be cursing the police, not calling them "bro."

And some of you wonder why this country has a bad reputation internationally. It's because images like this get out there. This is supposed to be the world's greatest democracy, and the reward for practicing democracy sometimes is that scrawny college boys get tackled to the ground and tortured. Meanwhile, the government system the boy was questioning is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands in Iraq, a war that shouldn't have happened and is terrorism anyway.

I dont think anyone here is claiming that he deserved to be tased for asking questions.

He actively resisted and fought restraint, thats why he got tased. He could have very easily made his point while being escorted out the door, but he chose violence. They even warned him before tasing, and he continued to fight. Many other people would have come out of that situation without being tased, he made that choice.

He was a dummy, and stupid hurts.