Student tasered at Kerry Spech

[crazyyaya 4]

On monday, while John Kerry was giving at speech at a University, a student came up to a mike, and asked a lenghty question. His mike was then cut and he was tasered shortly after. In a somewhat related story, the U.S. now ranks in 35th place in the world when it comes to free speech.

Here's a link to a video captured of the University situation.

[Voar Tok 4]

OK, I think the whole thing about getting tasered is over doing things from what I could tell. Then again, I don't know much about the situation, so that's just my opinion from what I could tell.

Now, about this ranking thing, where did you here this, and how in the heck did they conduct that study. It sounds like a pile of you know what to me.

[crazyyaya 4]

Originally posted by: Voar Tok

Now, about this ranking thing, where did you here this, and how in the heck did they conduct that study. It sounds like a pile of you know what to me.quote>

 

I can assure you the study is accurate and professional.

I read the article in TIME magazine, one of the most respected in the world. The study is done by the WorldWide Governance Indicators report. It ranks countries by the amount of fredom citizens have to voice opinions and aselect a government.

[Orlandoedwin640 0]

That was wrong what those cops did, totally wrong. I believe that boy is going to sue those people about that. I also read he has a condition.

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: crazyyaya

Originally posted by: Voar Tok

Now, about this ranking thing, where did you here this, and how in the heck did they conduct that study. It sounds like a pile of you know what to me.quote>

 

I can assure you the study is accurate and professional.

I read the article in TIME magazine, one of the most respected in the world. The study is done by the WorldWide Governance Indicators report. It ranks countries by the amount of fredom citizens have to voice opinions and aselect a government.quote>

And I would still love to know how they did that, because exercising free speech isn't exactly something you can easily measure.

[crazyyaya 4]

I think this is their main webpage. 

http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi2007/

[ShortStraw 1]

Here's a link to the CNN report on this story. 

This isn't really a free speech issue.  I don't know how one would measure free speech for a study either.

This was essentially a kid pulling a prank and some overzealous cops playing into his hands.  I don't think this incident reflects an overall trend toward reduced freedoms in America.

If I were going to examine reduced freedoms in my country I would look at things like wiretapping laws and airport security and other areas where Americans have freely given up certain liberties for the sake of national security ala "The Patriot Act".

[Insane Child of Bodom 1]

With Bush in power I'm surprised we aren't ranked 50th or even 75th...

Anyway cops always over react and if this kid doesn't sue hes passing up a real chance for a legitamate compensation...cuz normally when people sue its due to something ignorant...this thing is horrable and he needs to sue...

also i bet money Hungary is ranked below 100 when it comes to free speach....

[david1314 44]

Originally posted by: ShortStraw

This isn't really a free speech issue.  I don't know how one would measure free speech for a study either.quote>

I don't think you understand free speech.  It is not only the de jure professions of freedom to speak ones mind that constitutes free speech.  When a population is made to fear the police for nothing more than dissenting to a potential candidate, they are not free to express themselves (without fear of similar reprisal).

The same as when speaking ones mind jepordizes their career based on slanderous statements by government officials that they are un-american, uneducated, etc...

The same as when placing posters to remind people to police their neighbors (and that their neighbors are policing them), so don't step out of line and say something....[whisper]un-american[/whisper].

And more for the UKers, but increasingly for the US people: when the government outright films your actions so that democratic resistance to governance cannot be used to subvert illegitimate government 'judicial process' (for example where people are unwilling to testify to the occurrence of a 'crime' because they think the action in contempt of government legitimate).

Oh, outing secret operatives to show that the government has no interest in protecting its people who chose to exercise free speech.

Deliberately projecting the image your government has no interest in adhearing to the law it sets fourth to protect you and will eaves drop on you anyway...and then cases surface to confirm that illegally gathered wire-taps were in fact used against individuals without proper judicial oversight and deliberate and systematic violations of free speech...

Suggesting that Al Jazeera might in fact be a legitimate military target to show unacceptable journalism will not be tolerated (an attack that would have been unquestionably in violation of Geneva Conventions, International law, UN charter, UN human rights, US human rights, sovereignty...)

High profile 'terrorism' cases in which apparently circumstantial evidence obtained only from recorded conversation is used to convict someone based on laws passed AFTER his arrest.

Arresting Senators for 'conspiring to commit consentual sexual relations', based solely upon foot-taps and leg-bumps...showing that even Senators engaging in civil liberties is out of line.

I can keep going....is this enough?  Really, how the hell did we hit 35?  Or is this one of those things where the higher the number the freer the nation?

[Glenni 1,444]

You're on the path allright, it leads to freedom, but you go the opposite way.

[ShortStraw 1]

David, not only do I know what free speech is, I also agree with you on most everything you said.  My point was that this specific case is not a free speech issue as Meyer wasn't being detained for anything he said but rather for playing a prank.  If Meyer were dragged away because he said something inflammatory then it would be a free speech issue.  He was dragged away because organizers had cut off questioning before he went to the microphone and he was shouting.

This passage from the article I linked illustrates my point...

"Meyer was carrying a business card advertising  TheAndrewMeyer.com 'Speak My Mind,'  the police report said.

The Web site features videos of Meyer taking part in several practical jokes. It also includes a 'disorganized diatribe' that criticizes the war in Iraq and the media.

The Web site said his friends had posted coverage of his arrest.

In a statement issued Tuesday, Kerry said he didn't know a Taser had been used on the student until after he left the event, and said he hoped no one was injured.

'In 37 years of public appearances, through wars, protests and highly emotional events, I have never had a dialogue end this way,' he said.

'I believe I could have handled the situation without interruption, but again, I do not know what warnings or other exchanges transpired between the young man and the police prior to his barging to the front of the line and their intervention.'

So you see, it wasn't the content of the young mans speech that caused his arrest so this is not a free speech issue.  If anything it's a police brutality issue as the real wrongdoing was on the part of the individual officers over reacting and using a stun gun.

[Odainsaker 2,134]

Having watched the videos of him struggling against the police and wildly flailing about resisting arrest in order to pull his obviously pre-planned disruption...I can see why they did taser him. He was deliberately escalating the situation in order to make a point, and it reached the point where the physical scuffle he drew the officers into threatened to injure them or the bystanders. Their mistake was to not gag him while he was tasered, so all the overtly emotional screaming couldn't further disrupt the public audience and play into his hands when repeated on the nightly news clips. He asked his question, his free speach was maintained...he got wildly disruptive when Kerry did not respond, which is also Kerry's right not to do so, and then he turned physically chaotic when his prank to monopolize and browbeat the event was finally ended. Please, the punk is no Gandhi standing up in front of the oppressive British.

Oh well, but I do like the old Soviet style of stealthily coming up behind the shouting protester and sliding the needle of a concealed hypodermic full of strong fast-acting sedatives into their back through their clothes. They can then just be quietly guided back down into their assigned seat without anyone else realizing what has happened, muhuhahahah.

[coolotter88 2]

Yeah, no one cares about this idiot, he got his attention. the police tried to remove him and IIRC, he had no right to be at the keynote. Hence, he was trespassing and the police did have a right to arrest him, his struggle, was resisting arrest and he basically got into more trouble. Free speech was not harmed in the making of this video.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: coolotter88 Yeah, no one cares about this idiot, he got his attention. the police tried to remove him and IIRC, he had no right to be at the keynote. Hence, he was trespassing and the police did have a right to arrest him, his struggle, was resisting arrest and he basically got into more trouble. Free speech was not harmed in the making of this video.quote>

 

how did he not have a right to be at a political speach?

[Joesocwork 4]

On a local newscast after they did a segment on him, the local broadcasters reported that he straightened up when the cameras weren't around and told the policemen they did the right thing.  My 7 y.o. daughter can act better than this buffoonish yute.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[JanYpe 17]

Annoying kid learns actions have consequences, the painful way. Story at eleven!

[Jasoncw 11,840]

Originally posted by: Odainsaker Having watched the videos of him struggling against the police and wildly flailing about resisting arrest in order to pull his obviously pre-planned disruption...I can see why they did taser him. He was deliberately escalating the situation in order to make a point, and it reached the point where the physical scuffle he drew the officers into threatened to injure them or the bystanders. Their mistake was to not gag him while he was tasered, so all the overtly emotional screaming couldn't further disrupt the public audience and play into his hands when repeated on the nightly news clips. He asked his question, his free speach was maintained...he got wildly disruptive when Kerry did not respond, which is also Kerry's right not to do so, and then he turned physically chaotic when his prank to monopolize and browbeat the event was finally ended. Please, the punk is no Gandhi standing up in front of the oppressive British.quote>

I agree with this summary.

[Joesocwork 4]

^  Brattiness doesn't know geographical boundaries. 

[GingerBlokey 30]

Yes but brutal and un-needed policing does. You wouldnt get this in Canada or the UK. Tasers are only used where firearms are involved here.

[AndisArt 2,066]

If he was sensationalising or not, how could you possibly agree with the way the police handled this?

Tasering is torture!

And it puts the person in health dangers.

This kid didn't deserve this! (not that I'd agree that anyone deserves torture)

And by the way, I may disagree a bit with the way he did it, but the questions itself are for a free thinking mind obvious and natural.

I want to know why Kerry never contested his loss to Bush when there was so much controversy on the outcome of the election AGAIN!

I want to know what the Skulls&Bones secret society is that Bush and Kerry both are member of!

 

May the police have intervened because of the content of the questions or the kids behavior, in any case it shows me that it is not wished to question or ask uncomfortable questions. I agree the kid got a bit excited but at no point he was a threat to anyone nor did he bring the forum discussion to stop. Matter of fact the police didn't even let Kerry answer, they were up with him when he asked the FIRST question (about contesting)...

Don't think, don't get uncomfortable, just function and you'll be fine!

 

[Insane Child of Bodom 1]

Gb...your saying that you'd rather have the cops come in with those battons then teasers?

I mean I hear what your saying...I've been afraid of the police since I was attacked at age 11....

but yeh I'd rather have a teaser then a batton

[GingerBlokey 30]

Originally posted by: Insane Child of Bodom

Gb...your saying that you'd rather have the cops come in with those battons then teasers?

I mean I hear what your saying...I've been afraid of the police since I was attacked at age 11....

but yeh I'd rather have a teaser then a batton

quote>

You do realise that the baton is used on the legs and not upper body unless absolutly nessercary.

Id much rather me hit round the legs than tasered.

But actually my point was that the taser, in the UK, would never be used unless firearms were involved and not as a way of just subduing a victim as it was here.

I think tasers do have a place to play in policing but instead of guns and not as it was used in this instance. I think there would be so much more public outcry in the UK, police brutality seems acceptable in the US.

[Mikeaut1 261]

I'm going to have to agree half way with how the cops handled this situation. I think they could've done something else rather than taser him, like have all the cops pick him up and carry him out (and that was definitely possible, did you see all the cops around him)?

But 50% of me agrees with how the cops handled this situation. The guy would not shut up. I think he was more concerned with putting on a comedy show rather than asking Senator Kerry questions. It seemed he was in this just for the attention and nothing else.

I think people take the meaning of "free speech" way too strictly. Yes, it is our natural right, and it can't be taken away, and everyone is entitled to free speech, but there are some limitations to it! I doubt if the police did not intervene, this kid would've kept babbling on and on. And he didn't get it once the police were on top of him to shush.

The other 50% of me thinks a less severe punishment (if you will) could've been done (like what I mentioned above). It was possible for all those cops to carry him out, right? I mean, one kid against a bunch of police officers...

Quite a controversial scene though!

[GingerBlokey 30]

Originally posted by: Mikeaut1

I'm going to have to agree half way with how the cops handled this situation. I think they could've done something else rather than taser him, like have all the cops pick him up and carry him out (and that was definitely possible, did you see all the cops around him)?

But 50% of me agrees with how the cops handled this situation. The guy would not shut up. I think he was more concerned with putting on a comedy show rather than asking Senator Kerry questions. It seemed he was in this just for the attention and nothing else.

I think people take the meaning of "free speech" way too strictly. Yes, it is our natural right, and it can't be taken away, and everyone is entitled to free speech, but there are some limitations to it! I doubt if the police did not intervene, this kid would've kept babbling on and on. And he didn't get it once the police were on top of him to shush.

The other 50% of me thinks a less severe punishment (if you will) could've been done (like what I mentioned above). It was possible for all those cops to carry him out, right? I mean, one kid against a bunch of police officers...

Quite a controversial scene though!

quote>

So your point here is that someone who wanted to make a point by doing something a bit stupid or brazen should be tasered.

And just a note tasering is in no way like being electrocuted by an electric fence, it is like being paralysed and feeling hundereds of volts pass through you.

So people who heckle at Party Conferences, protestors who picket dressed in costumes, basically creative ways of protesting mean that people should be allowed to be tasered.

Its not as if they even told him to shut up they just dragged him off. I mean its just polite to at least try and cut him off or tell him to leave. Cooooome on!

[iamihop11 19]

First, the quality of that video is too poor to tell what really happened. It does look like he shoved and possibly took swings at some of the officers. He proceeded to curse at them, which is an example of a limitation of free speech. Free speech is not (and should not be) all-encompassing. He was permitted to ask his questions, but when his public conduct became unruly again, the officers felt it prudent to remove him. They didn't start out violently, but he resisted. That's not legal. At that point, they have cause to put him under arrest. Now the numbskull is getting into felony territory: assaulting (which is verbal) an officer/resisting arrest/maybe even battery, it's hard to tell. If he refuses to cooperate and resists arrest, potentially endangering others, the officers are perfectly free to use necessary force. They clearly tried other methods first, and the dip was specifically trying to make a scene: "Ah, look, see how they're picking on me. Brutality, brutality." I'm ashamed that he's American, like me, and a university student, like me.

[banks 0]

i just think cops and people in the US  over react with things way to much escplcey when it comes to like how u can express your self on tv and such idk i think im gonna move to canada or japan or england when im older unless things statr to chage i feel that now a days free speach is limtied

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[hamsterTK 93]

I'm sort of in agreement with barbarossa on all the points here

I wonder why Kerry did not answer him/tell him off? and why do they need to resort to tasering?

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: GingerBlokey

Originally posted by: Mikeaut1

I'm going to have to agree half way with how the cops handled this situation. I think they could've done something else rather than taser him, like have all the cops pick him up and carry him out (and that was definitely possible, did you see all the cops around him)?

But 50% of me agrees with how the cops handled this situation. The guy would not shut up. I think he was more concerned with putting on a comedy show rather than asking Senator Kerry questions. It seemed he was in this just for the attention and nothing else.

I think people take the meaning of "free speech" way too strictly. Yes, it is our natural right, and it can't be taken away, and everyone is entitled to free speech, but there are some limitations to it! I doubt if the police did not intervene, this kid would've kept babbling on and on. And he didn't get it once the police were on top of him to shush.

The other 50% of me thinks a less severe punishment (if you will) could've been done (like what I mentioned above). It was possible for all those cops to carry him out, right? I mean, one kid against a bunch of police officers...

Quite a controversial scene though!

quote>

So your point here is that someone who wanted to make a point by doing something a bit stupid or brazen should be tasered.

And just a note tasering is in no way like being electrocuted by an electric fence, it is like being paralysed and feeling hundereds of volts pass through you.

So people who heckle at Party Conferences, protestors who picket dressed in costumes, basically creative ways of protesting mean that people should be allowed to be tasered.

Its not as if they even told him to shut up they just dragged him off. I mean its just polite to at least try and cut him off or tell him to leave. Cooooome on!quote>

What? Have you taken to trolling? He just said they shouldn't have tasered him! It was a poor reaction by the cops, who could have just tossed him out the door. That doesn't mean this guy wasn't acting like a complete muppet. And they did talk to him first, as you can see in the video.

This kid, though, was not exercising his right to free speech. He was not abiding by the rules, and once asked to depart, he did not. When he became violent, the police had every right to remove him, but I still think tasering was overboard. He could do little damage to a group of police.quote>

Bang on the money.