Should I be furious? Or should I be dissapointed?

T

Thebestchefever

Registered Member
For those of you who have yet to hear;

Andrew Meyer, a college student at Florida State University was

"...placed under arrest, and after resisting was tasered by the police."
-University of Florida PR


This happened at a public forum where students, much like Andrew Meyer, were allowed to ask the guest, John Kerry a few questions.

firstcoastn ews . c o m/ video /p lay er.a spx ?aid =11 06 83&bw=
(with out spaces and new lines...sorry, i dont have 20 posts yet)

The above link is a video of what happened, caught by the news crew there,
however I know it is cut in some places so there is a lower quality one that is uncut below.

vi d e o. nb c6 . n e t/ p l a yer /?i d = 1 57250
(again without spaces and new lines...sorry!)

I usually don't get riled up by the police taking down a protester, and I will admit that Andrew was being a little brash. But was the taser really necessary? I mean it didn't even look like someone gave the order to take him out, it looks like they just went after him.

But thats not all, in the police report it said that they arrested him, and he resisted, therefore resulting in the taser. But in the video I did not hear any of the cops marandize him, nor did I hear them say the words "you are under arrest for...__________".

In addition to resisting arrest the other reason they arrested him was because he was "inciting a riot".

Here is the Legal definition of inciting a riot:

"TO INCITE A RIOT - Urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts. 18 USC"

- Lectlaw website

Seriously?

I watched this tape over and over, and not once did I see people start throwing chairs, or screaming uncontrollably. Everyone was still seated, how is this considered a riot?

I need to know if I am missing something. I mean, I know cops are still people and they make mistakes but...come on. This young man was no threat, even so John Kerry was going to answer his question...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
(This is a little side that I wanted to throw in but couldn't find a convenient place to squeeze it in...)

I actually considered that maybe there is some huge government conspiracy, because they arrested him after he pointed out that John Kerry had actually won the 2004 election...I highly doubt it but its interesting to think about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am mad that the cops didn't follow the guide line set forth by our government and I am disappointed at there lack of judgment in this case. I want to know what other people think as well. To make sure I am not the only one who feels this way.

I hate making any uninformed decisions so if anyone has any news that I missed here, it would be greatly appreciated if you would post it.

- Joe
 
Should you be furious ...or disappointed?

Neither, 'cause it ain't gonna' make no damned difference to anyone or anything ...except to yourself.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Should you be furious ...or disappointed?

Neither, 'cause it ain't gonna' make no damned difference to anyone or anything ...except to yourself.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. You shouldn't even care, I don't. I know there's the whole 'what if it happened to you' and all that, but it didn't and it won't...and if it did, I've been wanting to get tasered anyway, just to see what it feels like.
 
The police felt threatened so they pulled out Tazy the Tazer.
 
[a-5];1550294 said:
The police felt threatened so they pulled out Tazy the Tazer.
Click to expand...

The police felt the subject went against the law so they acted accordingly. police should have no fear, they are a unit of a government, they must act with force upon those who defy it. There shall be no room for fear.
 
Oniw17 said:
I feel the same way. You shouldn't even care, I don't. I know there's the whole 'what if it happened to you' and all that, but it didn't and it won't...and if it did, I've been wanting to get tasered anyway, just to see what it feels like.
Click to expand...

Its funny: you cared enough about his being upset to take action. But someone getting tasered has no effect on you at all.
 
Baron Max said:
Should you be furious ...or disappointed?

Neither, 'cause it ain't gonna' make no damned difference to anyone or anything ...except to yourself.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

People getting upset about certain things have led to a large amount of what we talk for granted as good in society today. And if you want to respond that it was actions, well sure. But in almost all cases first some people said they were upset or angry, then others said it, then action took place.
 
Grantywanty said:
Disobeyed the law is not enough justification for tasering someone by police guidelines anywhere in the US.
Click to expand...

He was not tazered for disobeying a law, but for resisting the duly appointed authority, the college authorities and officers.

Baron Max
 
Thebestchefever said:
For those of you who have yet to hear;

Andrew Meyer, a college student at Florida State University was "...placed under arrest, and after resisting was tasered by the police."
-University of Florida PR

This happened at a public forum where students, much like Andrew Meyer, were allowed to ask the guest, John Kerry a few questions.

I usually don't get riled up by the police taking down a protester, and I will admit that Andrew was being a little brash. But was the taser really necessary? I mean it didn't even look like someone gave the order to take him out, it looks like they just went after him.

But thats not all, in the police report it said that they arrested him, and he resisted, therefore resulting in the taser. But in the video I did not hear any of the cops marandize him, nor did I hear them say the words "you are under arrest for...__________".

In addition to resisting arrest the other reason they arrested him was because he was "inciting a riot".

I watched this tape over and over, and not once did I see people start throwing chairs, or screaming uncontrollably. Everyone was still seated, how is this considered a riot?

I need to know if I am missing something. I mean, I know cops are still people and they make mistakes but...come on. This young man was no threat, even so John Kerry was going to answer his question...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am mad that the cops didn't follow the guide line set forth by our government and I am disappointed at there lack of judgment in this case. I want to know what other people think as well. To make sure I am not the only one who feels this way.

I hate making any uninformed decisions so if anyone has any news that I missed here, it would be greatly appreciated if you would post it.

- Joe
Click to expand...

Theres several parts in your clip you seem to have missed.
Repost of link I viewed (I couldnt get the second one to load):
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/video/player.aspx?aid=110683&sid=91510&bw=hi&cat=2

He was warned by the security present and allowed to continue to ask his question.

He asked a question about conceding the election and did not allow Kerry to respond.

If you pay attention to the crowd reaction, you see people leaving, the couple who leave after the kid in the purple shirt are clearly leaving because of this man as one of them turns back to point at this character (maybe they knew his past behaviors and were trying to avoid the potential outburst to come). You also hear the crowd groan as this character carries on 'informing of the facts' and begin to shift around in their seats. All things to be watched for as security decides whether something should be stopped before it accelerates and involves more than the speaker.

He rambles on about impeachment and blow jobs, then the speaker asks about Skull and Bones (a separate question) before Kerry gets a chance to answer the concession question. What we dont know is who cut the line. It would seem to me the persons in charge of this presentation (and the audio set up) have signals they pass to the security present, most likely including "when we cut the mic move in and remove the speaker". I doubt the police shut off the mic.

As he struggles to evade the security, you see the cop on his right nearly take an elbow to the face as he tries to break free from their grip. This is after he runs towards the front of the room to evade the containment. Headed towards the speaker... That will get the hackles of any security to rise.

While he is on the floor you clearly see him struggling to resist arrest. If you listen to the tape at least two different officers are instructing him to Put his arms down /behind his back/ and to Let Go. Your miranda rights reading come AFTER you are arrested AND/IF you are going to be questioned. This is not required at the instant handcuffs are placed on you (which hadnt occured yet anyways). Oh, and he is screaming for help while being taken to the back of the room. That is inciting a riot. He is encouraging the crowd to become involved between him and the security. He encouraged the crowd to react to a situation beyond Kerry speaking and answering questions. You see the security struggle to place him in handcuffs (he is a big guy) and with the efforts of several being overwhelmed, they take the next step and taser him.

This is what happens when you resist arrest. Who should you be furious at? Try this moron who disrupted an honest attempt at the university for an exchange between students and a former presidential candidate. Disapointed? Try focusing on the people who protested the measures the security were forced to take on this individual who was resisting arrest, rather than worrying about future events on this campus being cancelled or rejected on application because the Uni is worried about security.
 
Baron Max said:
He was not tazered for disobeying a law, but for resisting the duly appointed authority, the college authorities and officers.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

I was responding to the way the person phrased their rule. Perhaps he did not mean it as a rule, but there are people who think that if you break the law the cops have a free hand. Some of these people are cops. The person I was responding to is free to say he meant in this specific case, given the person's specific actions.

Feel free to respond to my response to your post, also.
 
milkweed said:
Theres several parts in your clip you seem to have missed.
Repost of link I viewed (I couldnt get the second one to load):
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/video/player.aspx?aid=110683&sid=91510&bw=hi&cat=2This is what happens when you resist arrest.
Click to expand...

Not that simple.
He resisted being removed, physically, for speaking too long. Speaking too long is not a crime. The security officers were not enforcing a law. Shutting off the mike was an absolutely fair move. At that point dialogue without physical contact would have been smart and a slow escalation. It was poorly handled by security.
 
Grantywanty said:
Not that simple.
He resisted being removed, physically, for speaking too long. Speaking too long is not a crime. The security officers were not enforcing a law. Shutting off the mike was an absolutely fair move. At that point dialogue without physical contact would have been smart and a slow escalation. It was poorly handled by security.
Click to expand...

Security doesnt have to enforce a law, they enforce the rules. You see and kinda hear at the beginning where security tells him to ask his question (male voice at :38 sec mark) at :45 second mark a female voice repeats ask your question/ask the question. At :53 seconds this is repeated. At approx 1:20 he is again instructed by security and you see him wave off the attempts of security at 1:40 he is told by the male security ...This way. He was instructed and did not follow the instructions. At 3:04 he tells them to "get the fuck off" at 3:11 he is tasered after still refusing to comply.

We will never know how security intended to end this because he refused to comply with valid requests. But I see MANY opportunities for this character to avoid what occurred and sit down and LISTEN to Kerry's response.

Do you know what the rules of trespass are? In my home I have to ask you to leave once. Then I can use any force nessesary to remove you. I have to show cause as the engagement accelerates if you refuse to comply. I do not have to give you a second chance to behave.

This jerk ran towards the speaker. You dont get a second chance to rush a Senator. You dont get a second chance to rush a former presidential candidate. You dont get a second chance to rush a former president.

Want more examples? A bar can refuse service to anyone at any time. They will ask you to leave and then you can be bounced out the door. This works here in the Not so Public forum at the University. The security has the authority to determine the applicable rules of this exchange between Public and Invited Speaker.

As you can see above, security did give this man every opportunity to ask a question.
 
milkweed said:
Who should you be furious at? Try this moron who disrupted an honest attempt at the university for an exchange between students and a former presidential candidate. Disapointed? Try focusing on the people who protested the measures the security were forced to take on this individual who was resisting arrest, rather than worrying about future events on this campus being cancelled or rejected on application because the Uni is worried about security.
Click to expand...

And I can agree with that it makes sense. But I think that there are too many things we don't know about. Maybe there are some details that haven't been brought to light. Don't get me wrong I respect your opinion and it is logical and well presented however I am gonna have to say I am still a little dissapointed at the security. I can understand that sometimes in hectic situations orders can be tossed around and people make mistakes. But still that kid was just a student...I don't really know why but my gut instinct is saying that the cops over reacted.
 
Grantywanty said:
Its funny: you cared enough about his being upset to take action. But someone getting tasered has no effect on you at all.
Click to expand...

Taking 2 seconds to say that I don't see any reason to have grief over someone else's pain is taking action? So it's some kind of revolution if I go to a protest?
 
A couple of points:

• Provocateurs occasionally get smacked.

• This does not excuse the police; inconvenience is not an excuse for violence.​

When Meyer planned his stunt, he knew injury was a possible outcome. Technically, he got off lucky. The charges won't stick. The police, however, played right into his hands.

We should be both furious and disappointed: we should be furious that the police were that stupid and made the point; we should be disappointed, and furious, that in the grand scheme of things, nobody will really care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top