Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:10 am Post subject: LA Student tasered for having no ID card
NOT on topic, but everyone should see this anyway
Mind you it is: no 9/11 no Patriot act
Quote:
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38958
Quote:
[BREAKING NEWS]: Student shot with Taser by UCPD officers
Incident occured around 11:30 p.m. in the Powell Library CLICC computer lab
UCPD officers shot a student several times with a Taser inside the Powell Library CLICC computer lab late Tuesday night before taking him into custody.
No university police officers were available to comment further about the incident as of 3 a.m. Wednesday, and no Community Service Officers who were on duty at the time could be reached.
At around 11:30 p.m., CSOs asked a male student using a computer in the back of the room to leave when he was unable to produce a BruinCard during a random check. The student did not exit the building immediately.
The CSOs left, returning minutes later, and police officers arrived to escort the student out. By this time the student had begun to walk toward the door with his backpack when an officer approached him and grabbed his arm, at which point the student told the officer to let him go. A second officer then approached the student as well.
The student began to yell "get off me," repeating himself several times.
It was at this point that the officers shot the student with a Taser for the first time, causing him to fall to the floor and cry out in pain. The student also told the officers he had a medical condition.
UCPD officers confirmed that the man involved in the incident was a student, but did not give a name or any additional information about his identity.
Video shot from a student's camera phone captured the student yelling, "Here's your Patriot Act, here's your * abuse of power," while he struggled with the officers.
As the student was screaming, UCPD officers repeatedly told him to stand up and said "stop fighting us." The student did not stand up as the officers requested and they shot him with the Taser at least once more.
"It was the most disgusting and vile act I had ever seen in my life," said David Remesnitsky, a 2006 UCLA alumnus who witnessed the incident.
As the student and the officers were struggling, bystanders repeatedly asked the police officers to stop, and at one point officers told the gathered crowd to stand back and threatened to use a Taser on anyone who got too close.
Laila Gordy, a fourth-year economics student who was present in the library during the incident, said police officers threatened to shoot her with a Taser when she asked an officer for his name and his badge number.
Gordy was visibly upset by the incident and said other students were also disturbed.
"It's a shock that something like this can happen at UCLA," she said. "It was unnecessary what they did."
Immediately after the incident, several students began to contact local news outlets, informing them of the incident, and Remesnitsky wrote an e-mail to Interim Chancellor Norman Abrams.
Well, at least he was 'only' tasered and not shot.
Let's hope his medical condition doesn't turn out to be athlete's foot. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:11 am Post subject: Student Multiply TASARED for no ID
John White wrote:
NOT on topic, but everyone should see this anyway
Mind you it is: no 9/11 no Patriot act
Quote:
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38958
Quote:
[BREAKING NEWS]: Student shot with Taser by UCPD officers
Incident occured around 11:30 p.m. in the Powell Library CLICC computer lab
UCPD officers shot a student several times with a Taser inside the Powell Library CLICC computer lab late Tuesday night before taking him into custody.
No university police officers were available to comment further about the incident as of 3 a.m. Wednesday, and no Community Service Officers who were on duty at the time could be reached.
At around 11:30 p.m., CSOs asked a male student using a computer in the back of the room to leave when he was unable to produce a BruinCard during a random check. The student did not exit the building immediately.
The CSOs left, returning minutes later, and police officers arrived to escort the student out. By this time the student had begun to walk toward the door with his backpack when an officer approached him and grabbed his arm, at which point the student told the officer to let him go. A second officer then approached the student as well.
The student began to yell "get off me," repeating himself several times.
It was at this point that the officers shot the student with a Taser for the first time, causing him to fall to the floor and cry out in pain. The student also told the officers he had a medical condition.
UCPD officers confirmed that the man involved in the incident was a student, but did not give a name or any additional information about his identity.
Video shot from a student's camera phone captured the student yelling, "Here's your Patriot Act, here's your * abuse of power," while he struggled with the officers.
As the student was screaming, UCPD officers repeatedly told him to stand up and said "stop fighting us." The student did not stand up as the officers requested and they shot him with the Taser at least once more.
"It was the most disgusting and vile act I had ever seen in my life," said David Remesnitsky, a 2006 UCLA alumnus who witnessed the incident.
As the student and the officers were struggling, bystanders repeatedly asked the police officers to stop, and at one point officers told the gathered crowd to stand back and threatened to use a Taser on anyone who got too close.
Laila Gordy, a fourth-year economics student who was present in the library during the incident, said police officers threatened to shoot her with a Taser when she asked an officer for his name and his badge number.
Gordy was visibly upset by the incident and said other students were also disturbed.
"It's a shock that something like this can happen at UCLA," she said. "It was unnecessary what they did."
Immediately after the incident, several students began to contact local news outlets, informing them of the incident, and Remesnitsky wrote an e-mail to Interim Chancellor Norman Abrams.
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:35 am Post subject:
I'd like to point out something very important:
This guy couldnt comply: he'd just been tasared! The shock is considerable and motor functions are impared for some little time. Its said to be VERY painful. Despite this he was continuosly shocked multiple times, which is realistically comparable to being tortured as punishment for flapping his mouth about rights. Other students were threatened with being tasared if they tried to intervene
Once the President can torture anyone he cares to, the attitude quickly spreads through society
And the justification for this whole incident was the guydidn't have a plastic ID on him to be in the library. I counted four cops in the video: if four cops cannot remove one guy from a library after tasaring him ONCE, they are a disgrace to the very concept of the uniform
I did appreciate the flash of fear they showed when students were closing on them from all directions once they were in the hall outside the library though: thank goodness incidents like this are being exposed by those who know their true civic responsibility _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
Okay cards on the table - I firstly point out that I in no way condone what happened here, but;
You say he 'couldn't' comply, the guardian link you supplied says;
Quote:
Subsequent enquiries reveal that a community service officer approached the man in the library asking for his student identification. He refused to show it.
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
You also say that this type of mentality will/has permeated through society following the President torturing anyone he wants to. Torture has been around since the beginning, thumbscrews, the rack, whipping, water torture, removal of fingernails etc etc, this is far from a new concept. In my first week as a probationary police constable I witnessed a prisoner being beaten up in a police van, thirty years before Bush.
I also doubt Bush even knows of those tortured, this is done by individuals way down the foodchain and it is my belief it will happen and has happened regardless of Bush authorising it. He simply published and made known what you can expect if detained as a terror suspect.
Torture has nothing to do with Bush.
Yes, this is terrible incident that should not have happened, but given the details you have supplied, it appears it could have been avoided by simply doing what was requested.
I would add, it all appears to be a trifle well constructed. I am not saying it is bogus, BUT given the reason we are here and why these boards exist, we should take a step back and view this with an open mind and not take it at face value. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Although this does not have the same cattle prod barbarism, I am reminded of an incident which was brought to my attention in April 2005 which was equally disturbing and quite chilling. Police rendered protesters unconscious by applying pressure on the carotid artery. The video has an eeriniess about it which I am yet to explain to myself - I think it may be the reminiscence of stage hypnotists which make it look so harmless yet it it is clearly lethal force - the carotid artery supplies blood (ergo oxygen) to the brain. Brain death or brain damage can occur within a very few minutes of hypoxia or hypoxaemia.
It's interesting to note that television cameras were present but the incident was not reported in the mainstream news.
I've included all the video links because I have no idea which are still active. The link to the main story from the regional IMC is at the top:
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
I find this almost as worrying as the incident itself, TC. OK, I realise I have only quoted a small part of what you wrote and there is probably more to it. But there is a suggestion that he (and we) should feel obliged to produce identity cards - which in itself seems to lend support to the whole concept of identity cards.
As far as I am concerned, the guy was doing what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
I find this almost as worrying as the incident itself, TC. OK, I realise I have only quoted a small part of what you wrote and there is probably more to it. But there is a suggestion that he (and we) should feel obliged to produce identity cards - which in itself seems to lend support to the whole concept of identity cards.
As far as I am concerned, the guy was doing what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
Interesting view, but I just don't get the comparison.
Wasn't this essentially private property, a campus library and not a public place, again HUGE difference.
When you join a college, a new job, whatever, you sign an agreement to abide by the rules of the place. You have a photo taken, you are issued a pass which you show when requested. This NOT the same thing as someone walking down the street.
If I was a police officer in plain clothes and I wanted to ask you questions about something you witnessed, or you had something stolen and I visited your home and refused to show you my ID - where would that leave the situation??
The points you raise are not akin to the situation this thread is about. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:31 pm Post subject:
Quote:
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
Or perhaps could'nt becuase he didnt have it on him? Not the same was Wouldnt, is it? This is media spin to blame the victim for state violence: MSM reporting does this frequently. Maybe he didnt posses one? So what? Does not having the ID required to read a book mean one should expect to be tortured as a result? I never carry ID on general principle: I KNOW who I am
By extension, its the same argument that Iraqi's (or whoever else) "deserve it" for having Saddam as a Dictator: They could have overthrown him, but they didnt did they? Therefore they wouldnt, and deserve the violence perpetrated upon them to make them comply with "our wishes"
You may feel I am overstating the case there:
But I'm not: I've seen that very same argument made countless times _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:35 pm Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
flamesong wrote:
telecasterisation wrote:
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
I find this almost as worrying as the incident itself, TC. OK, I realise I have only quoted a small part of what you wrote and there is probably more to it. But there is a suggestion that he (and we) should feel obliged to produce identity cards - which in itself seems to lend support to the whole concept of identity cards.
As far as I am concerned, the guy was doing what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
Interesting view, but I just don't get the comparison.
Wasn't this essentially private property, a campus library and not a public place, again HUGE difference.
When you join a college, a new job, whatever, you sign an agreement to abide by the rules of the place. You have a photo taken, you are issued a pass which you show when requested. This NOT the same thing as someone walking down the street.
If I was a police officer in plain clothes and I wanted to ask you questions about something you witnessed, or you had something stolen and I visited your home and refused to show you my ID - where would that leave the situation??
The points you raise are not akin to the situation this thread is about.
I think one aspect you are completely missing here TC is the barbarity of the multiple taser charges being applied, self-justified by the voctim not 'complying' when he was not in a position to comply. It's akin to breaking someones legs (albeit temporarily in this case) then beating them when they refuse to stand up.
It is similar to the videod beating of Rodney King, which also clearly demonstrated that means way beyond 'reasonable force' were applied because the officers concerned stepped over the line of legal 'necessity' and engaged in pure sadism because they could, and thought their behaviour wouldn't be challenged.
The point about Bush's (unconstitutional) policies is that presidential approval removes one more inhibition on maintaining control over our own barbarity, which in the case of a law officer with means to cause actual bodily harm is not a restriction to be removed lightly, let alone a decision to be delegated to a guard in a library.
In a similar way what purpose did shooting Jean Charles de Menenzes six times in the head serve, apart from illustrating the stormtrooper mentality against citizens police forces in the West are increasingly adopting to counter this bogus terrorist threat we're being sold?
This is wouldn't not couldn't - huge difference. Would this have been avoided if he simply produced ID when asked for it by someone authorised to do so? Again I don't endorse the use of tasers, but at least he wasn't shot.
Or perhaps could'nt becuase he didnt have it on him? Not the same was Wouldnt, is it? This is media spin to blame the victim for state violence: MSM reporting does this frequently. Maybe he didnt posses one? So what? Does not having the ID required to read a book mean one should expect to be tortured as a result? I never carry ID on general principle: I KNOW who I am
By extension, its the same argument that Iraqi's (or whoever else) "deserve it" for having Saddam as a Dictator: They could have overthrown him, but they didnt did they? Therefore they wouldnt, and deserve the violence perpetrated upon them to make them comply with "our wishes"
You may feel I am overstating the case there:
But I'm not: I've seen that very same argument made countless times
I have been clear in the case I stated - I do not condone what happened.
However, did the young man say 'I am very sorry officer, I appear to have left it at home'? The evidence you supplied says;
Quote:
Subsequent enquiries reveal that a community service officer approached the man in the library asking for his student identification. He refused to show it.
I appreciate this is not what you would like to read, but altering the 'facts' will not change anything. He refused. If the report is wrong, then it is wrong, but you supplied evidence I quoted = HE REFUSED, not 'I don't have it'.
John, whilst you do not carry ID generally, if you buy something on credit, you produce a credit card that is issued to you. You may drive, in which case you agreed to have a licence issued to John White and you produce it if asked for by a police officer - if you don't have it at the time, you are issued a HORT1 and you produce within a week at a station of your choosing. These are all forms of identity card and you have agreed to abide by the rules of issue.
If you owned a business, you wouldn't want anyone walking in off the street and simply walking around, the same goes for your home. How many people have walked into American schools/colleges and started shooting? As a college/university administrator, I'd want some form of security. By the same token, I don't want paedophiles simply walking into my daughters' school.
Again, I don't agree with the action taken against this person, but the 'police' in question are just glorified security guards and people like you and me. If someone here continually flouts the rules, they are banned, action is taken.
You start quoting Iraq, you take this too far. However, if it wasn't for the fact that the officers on the beaches of Normandy displayed their badges of rank, clearly identifying who they were - we'd all be talking German now. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
I think one aspect you are completely missing here TC is the barbarity of the multiple taser charges being applied, self-justified by the voctim not 'complying' when he was not in a position to comply. It's akin to breaking someones legs (albeit temporarily in this case) then beating them when they refuse to stand up.
Nope, nothing missed, I have clearly stated I do not condone the action taken - they took it too far. I do not agree with what happened, BUT the way we suddenly bring up things like;
Quote:
As far as I am concerned, the guy was doing what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
I just don't get it - he was asked to produce evidence to say he was entitled to be where we was. What could be gained by refusing - he wasn't walking down the street, he was on private property?
Putting aside what happened after being asked, I see nothing wrong with asking to supply evidence of identity - if you were on security duty what would you do if you rightfully asked 'Halt! Who goes there?' and they refused to identify themselves - this is not a new concept.
Again - it was wrong to do what they did with the taser - yes I wholeheartedly agree with you, but the way the subsequent debate here goes way way way off track into stuff about Iraq and Bush is nonsense.
I ask the question once more - if you had something stolen and a man knocked at the door claiming to be a member of the CID refused to show his warrant card when you requested it - you'd be happy???? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject:
Quote:
You start quoting Iraq, you take this too far. However, if it wasn't for the fact that the officers on the beaches of Normandy displayed their badges of rank, clearly identifying who they were - we'd all be talking German now
I disagree: I recognise it is a dramatic extension, but the way the public justifies to themselves there attitude of passivity at the treatment of the Iraqi people (and other Wars) is identicle to how people justify to themselves passivity at the abuse of power by an agent of the state, its meerly a question of scale: both in the sense of "they must deserve it" and "Keep your head down don't attract trouble". The founding fathers of the US certainly understood how inequetous those attitudes are (and inherantly destructive of both freedom and democracy). How many people are silent over 9/11 truth becuase they dont want to risk bringing themselves to the attention of the State?
Well its speculation, but I'd hazard quite a few. Too late for all of us here of course
Rather than read the articles, I suggest you view the primary evidance, the video record of the event: then you may better be able to assess whether the written words are an entirely adequate explanation of the event: I feel you may find they are not. Even on a dial up connection, the video will load if started and paused for a few minutes, its not that long
PS: Normandy was a meat grinder: it wasnt respect for the chain of command that got men off that damn beach, it was the will to live and sticking with their brother in arms. Officers get the credit in the History books, but it was Corporals and Sergeants at best who won that god awful battle: same as most of 'em: and their authority came from respect for their qualities, not their pips _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
You start quoting Iraq, you take this too far. However, if it wasn't for the fact that the officers on the beaches of Normandy displayed their badges of rank, clearly identifying who they were - we'd all be talking German now
I disagree: I recognise it is a dramatic extension, but the way the public justifies to themselves there attitude of passivity at the treatment of the Iraqi people (and other Wars) is identicle to how people justify to themselves passivity at the abuse of power by an agent of the state, its meerly a question of scale: both in the sense of "they must deserve it" and "Keep your head down don't attract trouble". The founding fathers of the US certainly understood how inequetous those attitudes are (and inherantly destructive of both freedom and democracy). How many people are silent over 9/11 truth becuase they dont want to risk bringing themselves to the attention of the State?
Well its speculation, but I'd hazard quite a few. Too late for all of us here of course
Rather than read the articles, I suggest you view the primary evidance, the video record of the event: then you may better be able to assess whether the written words are an entirely adequate explanation of the event: I feel you may find they are not. Even on a dial up connection, the video will load if started and paused for a few minutes, its not that long
PS: Normandy was a meat grinder: it wasnt respect for the chain of command that got men off that damn beach, it was the will to live and sticking with their brother in arms. Officers get the credit in the History books, but it was Corporals and Sergeants at best who won that god awful battle: same as most of 'em: and their authority came from respect for their qualities, not their pips
John, I cannot make it any plainer - I agree with the fact that the man (although legally a child in America at 16, but still 6" and 236lbs), was treated unfairly - but I am not challenging that. I am supporting the right to request proof of identity on private property, or in any scenario where it can be legally requested.
You have ignored all the points I raised where YOU are happy to comply with this when it benefits you - i.e. purchasing something on credit - but you have avoided this. Instead we are transported to another round of 9/11/Iraq comparisons, when it is just a bunch of herberts who couldn't get into the regular force who have over-reacted.
As for Normandy, my father (he is 89 and still alive), was there, he tells a different story and I take his word above your's. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
If I was a police officer in plain clothes and I wanted to ask you questions about something you witnessed, or you had something stolen and I visited your home and refused to show you my ID - where would that leave the situation??
Well, here I can share some personal experience.
About three years ago I noticed on Indymedia that there was an animal rights demonstration going on that same day about a mile from where I live. I am not involved in animal rights but I was interested to know what the issue was so I went along with a DV camera and a minidisc recorder to find out.
After about an hour of very little happening several more protesters turned up (no more than ten in total) and I approached one to ask him why they were protesting (quite peacefully I hasten to add!). At this point some bloke dressed in plain clothes came up to me and demanded to know who I was. I responded by asking who wanted to know. He replied that he was a police officer. I asked to see his ID but he refused to show it but persisted in asking me who I was - I persisted with the point that anybody could say they were a police officer and refuse to show their ID!
Moments later I managed to get an audio interview (my camera batteries were not fully charged) with one of the demonstrators and as he was explaining whay they were protesting a bailiff (I later learned) came up to me and attempted to issue me with an injunction. I jumped back so that it did not touch me (I had been told by a solicitor some years earlier that they have to be put in your hand) but caught his words on the minidisc.
Shortly afterwards, I had to leave to go for a doctor's appointment and as I walked along the road a police car did a u-turn and mounted the pavement where I was walking. The officer inside asked to see what I had shot - I pointed out that I had captured very little as my batteries were flat. He grabbed my DV camera (attached to a monopod) and started pulling it. I let go simply because I did not want it to get damaged. He then said that he needed my address so that it could be returned. I had little choice - as soon as he had written down my address he gave me my camera back!
Two weeks later I was visited by two CID officers (both had been at the demonstration). They invited themselves into my home and grilled me for about an hour and a half about animal rights - I told them over and over again that I had no involvement. After thay left I assumed that was the end of it.
Several months later I was approached by a solicitor acting for one of the demonstrators if I would provide the recordings I had made that day for evidence. I did and was later told that they had proven that both police officers and the bailiff had lied under oath and the case was thrown out.
Again, I thought that was the end of it but I was arrested at the G8 last year and as I was being charged noticed that the desk sergeant wrote down 'animal rights activist' on the charge sheet. I asked why he had written it and he said that it was on my PNC record. Never having been arrested before (at least in this country) I found that quite a shock.
I have written to my local police authority and all I have been told is that I need to pay £10.00 to see my PNC record. As I know what is on it, that is hardly the issue. By chance I managed to seize a few words with the local inspector whose personnel were involved a few weeks ago but I was told that there was very little I could do.
Sorry to have strayed from the topic - but I just wanted to point out the consequences of actually challenging a plain clothed police officer to prove that he is in fact a bona fide police officer.
Plus, it illustrates that any attempt to stand up for ones rights can and does lead to false 'intelligence' and dishonest records. I have never been involved in animal rights activism but animal rights activists are second only to Al-Quaida on the police list of excuses to weild absolute power.
Sorry to have strayed from the topic - but I just wanted to point out the consequences of actually challenging a plain clothed police officer to prove that he is in fact a bona fide police officer.
I am unable to comment on the 'false intelligence' angle, however an officer in plain clothes (and indeed a uniformed officer if you so request), must produce their warrant card if so asked. If you refuse to answer questions of a uniformed officer, you cannot really argue you did not know they were police for obvious reasons - but you are not obliged to say anything if no warrant card is produced by a plain clothed 'officer'.
It really makes no sense to refuse to show your warrant card (unless of course you have forgotten it).
The obvious by-product is if you refuse, they attempt to arrest you and you end up giving them a right-hander, the officer will not admit they refused to show the card if it goes to court.
I can only say that the officers of today are a different animal to those of just a few years ago - the training I don't believe is any different, they are merely a symptom of our society. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
although legally a child in America at 16, but still 6" and 236lbs
Are you sure he wasn't a pianist?
Quote:
If I was a police officer in plain clothes and I wanted to ask you questions about something you witnessed, or you had something stolen and I visited your home and refused to show you my ID
I would taser you immediately! Repeatedly. To death - then I would have you charged for loitering. But then again - I am a fascist!
No, I am unable to comment on his musical prowess. He is reported to have been using a computer, so the keys on the keyboard of a PC are the only ones I know he was able to use.
As for your statement about violence, women do need to protect themselves.
Have you considered a self-defence class if you are that worried about your personal well-being? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Have you considered a self-defence class if you are that worried about your personal well-being?
I have no worries about a six inch pianist. Men wearing raincoats who knock at my door without revealing themselves is also not a matter for concern.
I freely admit I mistyped and should have in fact entered 6' (as being 6ft tall is how the 'victim' is reported), however, the pianist reference and raincoats will need some additional explanation?
I fear though, we are on another of your foul/base references type posts again.
Please prove me wrong - I despair of British women, whatever has made you so coarse? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
There appears to be a huge dichotomy between what we say we don't want or don't accept and what we are prepared to utilise in order to exist as members of a civilised society.
What does this mean exactly?
Firstly, I am against national ID cards for the sake of being 'tracked' or our behaviour logged, it is important that I make this clear - I am not in favour of ID cards per se or being chipped. However, our entire society is based upon a recognised system by which we identify who we are, our age, height, nationality, sex, qualifications, the list goes on.
This is important for many reasons and how each impacts your life is a matter of circumstance as much as it is based upon your views and opinions. There appears to be great resistance via these threads regarding being asked to supply 'proof' by authority figures and it is this, that I simply do not understand.
To elaborate further. To simply stop and question a person in the street and demand evidence of who they are is highly questionable - a scenario I do not condone, but thus far I have seen not one reasoned view or point that can explain the problem with being on private property and supplying evidence of who you are when asked to do so.
We have existed for centuries by following a recognised pattern of behaviour, much of which is entrenched in the understanding that certain conventions exist to bring order to what would otherwise be chaos. Do I now refuse to put my rubbish bin out on Monday for emptying because I am ‘required’ to do so by the local authority?
In the earlier part of this thread, I clearly stated I did not agree with the entire taser incident and we rolled through all the usual diatribe of deliberate misunderstanding, Bush and Iraq references and esoteric meanderings;
Quote:
I recognise it is a dramatic extension, but the way the public justifies to themselves there attitude of passivity at the treatment of the Iraqi people (and other Wars) is identicle to how people justify to themselves passivity at the abuse of power by an agent of the state
I repeat, I don’t condone what happened with the whole taser thing, nor do I endorse national ID cards, BUT I am absolutely certain that every member of this forum relies on any number of identification based protocols and safeguards just to exist.
They’d be the first to shout if they received their monthly credit card bill to find someone had been spending thousands on their behalf. Or their vehicle’s number plate had been cloned and used for robbery or to rack up thousands in speeding fines. When you open an email account you stipulate a username because you want them to come to you. I don’t hear anyone complaining about having to create a username to post here – we just do it no questions asked because it is required.
I just don’t get the logic with the whole challenge concept, how exactly do we benefit from?;
Quote:
what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
_________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
It appears that some cops are eager to ue thier new powers. _________________ "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind..." Bod Marley
Do I now refuse to put my rubbish bin out on Monday for emptying because I am ‘required’ to do so by the local authority?
You are not required to do so. Just leave it - the local authority won't care. The issue is why authorities DO care about stopping people randomly and demanding information, or insisting on questioning people who are behaving lawfully. Where is the limit on reaction? Should they have shot him dead - after all he was disobeying their orders to stand up! It is a question of what is reasonable and although that may be debated it seems like repeatedly tasering a man because he refused to walk out of a library is a bit excessive. Those things can and do kill!
There appears to be a huge dichotomy between what we say we don't want or don't accept and what we are prepared to utilise in order to exist as members of a civilised society.
What does this mean exactly?
Firstly, I am against national ID cards for the sake of being 'tracked' or our behaviour logged, it is important that I make this clear - I am not in favour of ID cards per se or being chipped. However, our entire society is based upon a recognised system by which we identify who we are, our age, height, nationality, sex, qualifications, the list goes on.
This is important for many reasons and how each impacts your life is a matter of circumstance as much as it is based upon your views and opinions. There appears to be great resistance via these threads regarding being asked to supply 'proof' by authority figures and it is this, that I simply do not understand.
To elaborate further. To simply stop and question a person in the street and demand evidence of who they are is highly questionable - a scenario I do not condone, but thus far I have seen not one reasoned view or point that can explain the problem with being on private property and supplying evidence of who you are when asked to do so.
We have existed for centuries by following a recognised pattern of behaviour, much of which is entrenched in the understanding that certain conventions exist to bring order to what would otherwise be chaos. Do I now refuse to put my rubbish bin out on Monday for emptying because I am ‘required’ to do so by the local authority?
In the earlier part of this thread, I clearly stated I did not agree with the entire taser incident and we rolled through all the usual diatribe of deliberate misunderstanding, Bush and Iraq references and esoteric meanderings;
Quote:
I recognise it is a dramatic extension, but the way the public justifies to themselves there attitude of passivity at the treatment of the Iraqi people (and other Wars) is identicle to how people justify to themselves passivity at the abuse of power by an agent of the state
I repeat, I don’t condone what happened with the whole taser thing, nor do I endorse national ID cards, BUT I am absolutely certain that every member of this forum relies on any number of identification based protocols and safeguards just to exist.
They’d be the first to shout if they received their monthly credit card bill to find someone had been spending thousands on their behalf. Or their vehicle’s number plate had been cloned and used for robbery or to rack up thousands in speeding fines. When you open an email account you stipulate a username because you want them to come to you. I don’t hear anyone complaining about having to create a username to post here – we just do it no questions asked because it is required.
I just don’t get the logic with the whole challenge concept, how exactly do we benefit from?;
Quote:
what I hope many other people will have the guts to do. If there aren't enough people willing to challenge authority in a non-violent way like this, to put it bluntly, we are fücked!
Ok Telly
next time you fail to log on or produce your ID we will have an electrode attached to each of your testicles and give you a couple of blasts of 10,000 volts
You won't forget next time - great idea don't you think?
You are not required to do so. Just leave it - the local authority won't care.
Not required to, won't care? Completely untrue. You are legally required to ensure your litter is dealt with - if you leave litter, especially domestic waste that will attract vermin, a legal notice directing the owner of the land to clear the rubbish will be issued. If you don't comply, then you are liable to be prosecuted.
To say the local authority don't care are the words of someone who has zero clue.
I wouldn't expect a woman to know this though.
Quote:
Should they have shot him dead - after all he was disobeying their orders to stand up!
Do you have some kind of software problems stopping chunks of the thread being displayed? I have clearly, openly and repeatedly stated that I believe what happened to the young man in the library was wrong. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
next time you fail to log on or produce your ID we will have an electrode attached to each of your testicles and give you a couple of blasts of 10,000 volts
You won't forget next time - great idea don't you think?
You struggling with the concept too? I have never condoned the use of tasers. I have been very clear about this - I do however see no problem with asking someone on private property to prove they have the right to be there. If you went home and found a stranger in your living room - how long would you leave them there without enquiring?
I repeat again - I do not endorse the excessive use of force. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Not required to, won't care? Completely untrue. You are legally required to ensure your litter is dealt with - if you leave litter, especially domestic waste that will attract vermin, a legal notice directing the owner of the land to clear the rubbish will be issued. If you don't comply, then you are liable to be prosecuted.
To say the local authority don't care are the words of someone who has zero clue.
I wouldn't expect a woman to know this though.
bs. The chances of an LA pursuing someone are nil unless there are rats everywhere. You would have to b* the local mayor to get their attention.
So it takes a man to know things? OK! Now I realize what an intellectual giant I am dealing with I will get in my place. Wow - What a man!!!!!
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:02 pm Post subject: Some possible alternatives to tasering...
They could've said:
"Which Hall of residence are you in?"
"Do you have friends nearby?"
To other students: "Has this guy been causing trouble?"
"Can we call your parents or a relative?"
<One of many other verification questions.> _________________ Andrew
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
