Police brutality continues
Talesin
Our own little well of hate Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Our own little well of hate Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">At UCLA no less</div>Following link contains raw footage of police brutality; repeatedly tasering a student who did not have ID and initially refused to leave, quietly reading in the Library. Contains (obviously) strong language, and the result of Bush's fearmongering (UCLA is on 'high terror alert', listed as one of the top six terrorist targets in CA).
<a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs" target="_blank">http://youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs</a>
I normally am a very peaceful individual. If I had been there and had the means, I would have taken to the officers in question with anything close to hand. You do not taser someone repeatedly and order them to stand up, when they are offering to leave peacefully if the officers would release his arms.
This is completely despicable. Hopefully the badge numbers (which the officers refused to provide, VERY much against the law) were later obtained, and a civil suit will be brought against the officers in question.
Just seeing this raises the desire to have been there with a baseball bat close to hand.
<a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs" target="_blank">http://youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs</a>
I normally am a very peaceful individual. If I had been there and had the means, I would have taken to the officers in question with anything close to hand. You do not taser someone repeatedly and order them to stand up, when they are offering to leave peacefully if the officers would release his arms.
This is completely despicable. Hopefully the badge numbers (which the officers refused to provide, VERY much against the law) were later obtained, and a civil suit will be brought against the officers in question.
Just seeing this raises the desire to have been there with a baseball bat close to hand.
Comments
The first thing you hear on the video is him screaming obscenities and <i>ordering</i> the officers not to touch him. When an officer decides that you're under arrest- that's it. Done. Kaput, over. You stop resisting and you do whatever they say, because that's the least painful way out of the immediate situation for everyone. The courts will decided if you're guilty, and then if you're not, you can take action against the police who did it to you.
They asked him to leave several times, he did not. They tried to force him, he resisted. They shocked him a good one, and he complained about a medical condition, said he would leave, and then made a speech. They told him to get up, and he just lay there, they tried to drag him and he resisted.
He's quite simply resisting arrest.
Could they have handled it differently? Probably. Where they feeling the affects of adrenaline and perhaps not thinking as clearly as they should have? Probably. Are they a fascist arm of a corrupt government? Absolutely not.
I know well that you don't mess with police on a college campus. I'm come from one that riots and burns down its town after every game. (or used to... the police straightened that out) Used to see this kind of stuff all the time. This is someone trying to buck authority, nothing more.
Things aren't as bad as either side makes them out to be. Come join the Chill party for '08.
Why and the hell would you taser someone then tell them to stand up...the whole point of tasering someone is to put them on the ground.
The student in question was an idiot but the cops should of handeled this better.
What I KNOW are facts...
1. The police want to remove this person from a building.
2. It's at a library on a college campus.
3. There are lots and lots of worked up 20 somethings around. And only 4 police that I can see.
4. We only see video from the start of the tazing, not anything leading up to it.
What I THINK are facts....
1. The guy was in handcuffs, which means this event had been happening long enough for the police to come over and put handcuffs on the guy. I'm going to assume that means this has been at the bare minimum a 10 minute ordeal from initial "get out" from random librarian, to footage start. That's a lot of time to walk out.
2. The cops are surrounded by a LOT of those 20 something college kids. These are the same people that are slowly trying to break their EMO suicide thought a day habit.
3. The guy looked/sounded caucasian to me, there are no racial prejudice cards to be played.
What I extrapolate from what I perceive happened. For the sake of brevity, we're going to call the tazee Bob.
Bob gets asked to leave by a student working at the library. Bob doesn't respect the authority of the desk jockey and ignores him.
Campus security (not quite cops) are called in, Bob starts off telling them a sob story about how he lost his id and needs to finish a paper today. Campus security says that's not good enough and start to do the grab of the arm escort out of the library. Bob resists and starts spouting the whole "Don't touch me" bit (not where the video starts yet). Let this simmer for 3 minutes and Bob is now hopped up on adrenaline.
Regular police are called in. Bob gives them around 60 seconds of crap before they try the grab of the arm escort thing. Bob shrugs it off again (mind you that shrugging off a cop is not a simple pull and wag of the finger) and we again see the display of "Don't touch me" (still not video start yet). This is the exact moment that the handcuffs come out, and Bob realizes they're for him. At this point the police's plan is to handcuff Bob, take him outside and have a chat until he calms down. Bob refuses to be handcuffed and gets a surprise tazing.
Now he's on the floor and the handcuffs are on. The police try to get him back up to his feet not by asking, but by lifting. This is where the video starts recording. "DON'T TOUCH ME!"
Bob has completely lost control and refuses to be dragged out. And mind you that a swift kick to the shin from Bob is not what any of these cops want, and he looks like a flailer. Which is why you get the repeated requests to stand up.
Video scene plays out as seen......
As for telling the bystander to get back or he'll get tazed, you can tell he's got that whole pacing back and forth thing going like he's about to swing at someone. At this point the heavily outnumbered police are in crowd control mode and that means that they can't afford for one fist to fly, or you'll have a surefire brawl. I don't believe for a second that the cop was offering a tazing because he was asking for badge numbers it was the whole demeanor and situation.
So, to recap. Do I think my above telling happened verbatim? No. But I'm willing to believe that it was the case just as easily as the opposite.
Oh, and getting tazed isn't brutality. Yeah, it hurts like hell, but you'll be fine in a couple hours.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Oh, and getting tazed isn't brutality. Yeah, it hurts like hell, but you'll be fine in a couple hours.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is, by definition, brutal. I don't think it is okay to excuse the brutality based on the brief recovery time. If you excuse it based on the short recovery time, then all violent actions that don't cause lasting physical damage would be, by your definition, not brutal.
It is, by definition, brutal. I don't think it is okay to excuse the brutality based on the brief recovery time. If you excuse it based on the short recovery time, then all violent actions that don't cause lasting physical damage would be, by your definition, not brutal.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to make it seem like I said something I didn't, it's just not cool.
And since you're playing the technicality card, here's your response......
Tazing is indeed "Brutal"
<!--QuoteBegin-Brutal+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Brutal)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(of weapons or instruments) causing suffering and pain; "brutal instruments of torture"; "cruel weapons of war"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But does NOT qualify as "Brutality"
<!--QuoteBegin-Brutality+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Brutality)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->ferociousness: the trait of extreme cruelty<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960" target="_blank">http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960</a>
Short version, the student was already leaving when the officers arrived. The tape starts when they accost him *on his way out*, with the screamed bit about getting their hands off him. The delay between the first tasering and the subsequent ones are when he is being handcuffed.
Also, here is the link for UCLA's policies on taser use, in PDF form:
<a href="http://dailybruin.com/documents/2006/11/17/taserpolicy.pdf" target="_blank">http://dailybruin.com/documents/2006/11/17/taserpolicy.pdf</a>
As for the 'terror alert' bit, UCLA is again on high alert. My mother actually works there as maintenence staff; the amount of bureaucratic nonsense is apparently ridiculous at this point. They ARE convinced that they will end up with a bomb on campus, some suicide-fanatic, or a violent demonstration. The whole 'terrorism scare' bit is why they instituted the 'no one in the library after 11pm without a BruinCard' rule.
Apparently he'd arrived before 11pm, and was reading. He'd forgotten his ID and wanted to finish reading a section of a book, refusing to leave. He was detained <i>on his way out</i> and repeatedly tasered while in handcuffs, both after complying (watch, he stands up and is tasered) and after he is unable to stand.
Yes, this counts as 'police brutality'. The officers in question had best start looking for jobs elsewhere... if not for the repeatedly-tasered individual (which actually at this point may fall into the realm of torture, not simple brutality), then for threatening to taser someone for requesting the officer's badge number. That's assault right there, plain and simple.
I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to make it seem like I said something I didn't, it's just not cool.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My apologies if that is what you thought I was trying to do, I was merely attempting to argue against your point by pointing out that your interpretation of brutality is too loose to be useful.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
(of weapons or instruments) causing suffering and pain; "brutal instruments of torture"; "cruel weapons of war"
Tazing is indeed "Brutal"
But does NOT qualify as "Brutality"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
From the same definition ( <a href="http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=brutality" target="_blank">http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=brutality</a> - found with google define: brutality )
"a brutal barbarous savage act"
I'd consider tasering someone to be both barbarous and savage, unless it is in self-defense or intended to protect someone from causing harm to others. I guess some people differ in that opinion, and consider tasering someone to be within the realm of normal human violence ( and therefore not brutality ).
The meaning of the word doesn't change what the cop did to the guy. Democratic governments shoulder the responsibility of designating which organisations are allowed to commit violent acts within the law, and what the preconditions required for such an act of violence are. To me it seems sensible that such violence should only be permitted when it is necessary to do so to prevent a citizen from being harmed. Was there suspicion that the student had a means to cause harm?
Down here in NZ we've just started employing these tasers and they have been really successful from what I understand. Unfortunately stupid incidents like this fuel the individuals in my country who want to ban the tasers, leaving our police with no ability to deal with armed offenders except with lethal force (Steven Wallace incident springs to mind).
My apologies if that is what you thought I was trying to do, I was merely attempting to argue against your point by pointing out that your interpretation of brutality is too loose to be useful.
From the same definition ( <a href="http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=brutality" target="_blank">http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=brutality</a> - found with google define: brutality )
"a brutal barbarous savage act"
I'd consider tasering someone to be both barbarous and savage, unless it is in self-defense or intended to protect someone from causing harm to others. I guess some people differ in that opinion, and consider tasering someone to be within the realm of normal human violence ( and therefore not brutality ).
The meaning of the word doesn't change what the cop did to the guy. Democratic governments shoulder the responsibility of designating which organisations are allowed to commit violent acts within the law, and what the preconditions required for such an act of violence are. To me it seems sensible that such violence should only be permitted when it is necessary to do so to prevent a citizen from being harmed. Was there suspicion that the student had a means to cause harm?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What matters is the context. Fists can be classified as weapons of brutality when used in an unrelenting manner.
I think the key thing people are missing here is that the officers repeated asked the suspect to "stand up, or you'll be tazed again. Stand up!" They hurt, but they aren't like punches and kicks. About a minute after the use of one of these things, the one who was tazed can move again freely. He was willfully disregarding their orders. I believe if officers were called into the university, they hard authority there, making their orders absolute.
Like T_h_e_m said, when you have a disruptive suspect like that, who could at any second lash out and possibly harm you, or say, get a hold of you sidearm, you do NOT give them the chance. Certainly not a crowded room full of college students. If that means you have to taze them into oblivion, then that's what must happen.
I guess I'm trying to say that the officers surely acted in their best judgment. Does that exclude them from some kind of punishment? No way in hell. They'll probably all be fired, at least.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->whats retarded is they tell him to stand up after they just got don shooting what 10k volts through his body? or however much it his.... obviously those officers have never been tasered.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe being tazed is part of standard training when being required to wield the devices. The voltage disables your body while it's being applied, but afterwards you regain control of yourself. The scream is as much from the seizure of your muscles as it is from pain.
4) GENERAL Although not absolutely prohibited, officers should give additional consideration to the unique circumstances involved prior to
C) Individuals who are handcuffed or otherwise restrained;
What I see in that video is a cop who repeatedly applies pain to a handcuffed individual in order to force compliance.
Secondly, drawing attention to the article that Talesin has linked in this topic:
Here's a quote from the article:
But according to a study published in the Lancet Medical Journal in 2001, a charge of three to five seconds can result in immobilization for five to 15 minutes, which would mean that Tabatabainejad could have been physically unable to stand when the officers demanded that he do so.
Here's a quote from rob:
hey hurt, but they aren't like punches and kicks. About a minute after the use of one of these things, the one who was tazed can move again freely.
Now, I'm no expert so I'm tempted to trust the lancet over Rob.
people can usually move freely about a minute after a punch or a kick too rob, so they are like them in that regard.
And with that in mind, lets look at the critical point in Rob's post:
"I think the key thing people are missing here is that the officers repeated asked the suspect to "stand up, or you'll be tazed again. Stand up!""
It is feasible that the victim was simply too angry, in too much pain, or too incapacitated to comply with the police. How did they end up in such a situation? Surely there will be evidence of a realistic threat of danger from the guy. The defense that Rob makes for these police is exactly the same defence that was presented by those who shot Jean Charles de Menezes dead on the London Underground, for basically, looking middle eastern. I'm not in anyway trying to compare the actions of both sets of police, but the defence is very similar.
The first thing you hear on the video is him screaming obscenities and <i>ordering</i> the officers not to touch him. When an officer decides that you're under arrest- that's it. Done. Kaput, over. You stop resisting and you do whatever they say, because that's the least painful way out of the immediate situation for everyone. The courts will decided if you're guilty, and then if you're not, you can take action against the police who did it to you.
They asked him to leave several times, he did not. They tried to force him, he resisted. They shocked him a good one, and he complained about a medical condition, said he would leave, and then made a speech. They told him to get up, and he just lay there, they tried to drag him and he resisted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
dude, i really hope you don't mean what you are saying. It's really sad. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/confused-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="???" border="0" alt="confused-fix.gif" />
The police is in no danger. If there would be any danger to the police i can understand they use a tazer! Like when the guy is carrying a gun and isn't arrested yet a tazer can be usefull to paralise him for a sec and remove leathal weapons.
BUT the guy is allready arrested. He is helpless on the floor. His hands are tied behind his back.
I would like to see YOU stand up after you get an electroshock with your hands behind your back. It's impossible! That's what a tazer is meant to do, keep you down.
The police could have dragged him out if he refused to stand up, i'm sure 4 people can carry 1 guy!
This situation is really sad.
Guilty or not, this brutal behaviour is unacceptable. It's not because they have to maintain the law that they are the law and can use/do wathever they like!!!
If anything like this would be filmed in my country i'm sure it would stir things up and some people would have to resign.
BUt when I hear you talking it sounds like every day life. The more you think something is acceptable the more they will take advantage of it and it will become worse. I sure hope this is a unique situation otherwise i feel really sorry for all you people.
this is in US right?
The most ###### up government of the world. The american dream turned into a nightmare.
It is a incapacitating device which will inflict a lot of pain, as well as the possible puncture of skin due to the probes.
Also, <a href="http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511392004" target="_blank">Amnesty International’s concerns about deaths and ill-treatment involving police use of tasers</a> and <a href="http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijrdm/vol5n1/lethal.xml#documentHeading-ElectricalIncapacitationDevices" target="_blank">Medical Aspects of Less Lethal Weapons</a> suggests that the lethality of tasers have not yet been mapped, which (in my eyes) renders it as something that shouldn't be used lightly.
Edit:
Other links of interest:
- Death by Taser: The Killer Alternative to Guns ( <a href="http://www.alternet.org/rights/44455" target="_blank">http://www.alternet.org/rights/44455</a> )
- Death sparks Taser safety concern ( <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/6062666.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/6062666.stm</a> )
No, a taser is not the same as a punch or a kick. It hurts a hell of a lot more, it disables you for quite a bit longer, and a single discharge on an aggressive and NONCOMPLIANT subject requires quite a bit of paperwork.
In this case, it was being used on a vocally compliant individual, as well as had its use threatened on a bystander who was attempting to get the officers' information.
Also, at the end of one article, it states that anyone who has been inflicted with more than two to three full (3-5 second) taser cycles MUST be checked by medical staff to ensure no permanent damage. Meaning the possibility not only exists, but is LIKELY. And he ended up with quite a bit more than two or three.
Rob, a taser is a MUCH nastier weapon than you seem to assume. I would heavily suggest stopping by your local police station, and requesting a demonstration of the 'drive stun' mode on a fully charged unit. An associate of mine who works in the security industry was offered to *keep* a taser unit (along with free training) if he could stand back up within two minutes after being tased. He could not, and refused to try again when offered the opportunity, offering to inflict rather grievous physical harm on the one holding it if they brought it near him in his current state (laying limp on the floor, barely able to breathe).
It doesn't just hurt for a second and make you flop around, as with those cheap 'stun guns' they sell. It hurts, and keeps on hurting, like your muscles and bones are on fire.
First, what do you KNOW about what happened? And what do you THINK happened.
What I KNOW are facts...
1. The police want to remove this person from a building.
2. It's at a library on a college campus.
3. There are lots and lots of worked up 20 somethings around. And only 4 police that I can see.
4. We only see video from the start of the tazing, not anything leading up to it.
What I THINK are facts....
1. The guy was in handcuffs, which means this event had been happening long enough for the police to come over and put handcuffs on the guy. I'm going to assume that means this has been at the bare minimum a 10 minute ordeal from initial "get out" from random librarian, to footage start. That's a lot of time to walk out.
2. The cops are surrounded by a LOT of those 20 something college kids. These are the same people that are slowly trying to break their EMO suicide thought a day habit.
3. The guy looked/sounded caucasian to me, there are no racial prejudice cards to be played.
What I extrapolate from what I perceive happened. For the sake of brevity, we're going to call the tazee Bob.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some facts that are appearing on <a href="http://www.laist.com/archives/2006/11/20/taserhappy_cops_history_was_one_reason_for_tasers_at_ucla.php" target="_blank">various</a> <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-taser21nov21,0,1459046.story?coll=la-home-headlines" target="_blank">articles </a> about this incident:
1. The guy getting tasered is Mostafa Tabatabainejad. He resisted the officers because he thought he was being singled out for his appearance. He's an American but of Iranian descent. It does put into perspective his angry cries about the PATRIOT act.
2. One of the officers in the video, Terrence Duran, has a previous record of use of violent force. In one <a href="http://www.ucpd.ucla.edu/ucpd/bulletin_crime_briefs.html" target="_blank">incident</a> he shot a homeless man although that seems to be justified as the man attacked him. There also seems to be something about using a nightstick to choke a fratboy but I can't seem to find anything to back that up.
Tasering a resisting person once, I can see as being somewhat reasonable. In fact that's probably one of the reasons those cops have tasers, to avoid having to resort to lethal force when your life is in danger (see homeless man shooting incident). But to taser someone repeatedly? Thats crossing the line into brutality.
From the video I don't even see the initial use of the taser as being justified. He was not putting the lives of the officers in any danger at all. Sure he was being a little uncooperative but from the sound of his scream of pain I would say he wasn't expecting any physical confrontation at all, which one can argue is a sign that he wasn't going to hurt the officers.
What I see in the video are officers using an unwarranted amount of force to instill compliance. They had a passively resisting subject and yet they have to use a taser on him repeatedly? Just wrong.
Tasering a resisting person once, I can see as being somewhat reasonable. In fact that's probably one of the reasons those cops have tasers, to avoid having to resort to lethal force when your life is in danger (see homeless man shooting incident). But to taser someone repeatedly? Thats crossing the line into brutality.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Judging from that video where he just flat out refused but did not attack the officer, do you still stand by the stance of tasering? Considering much better and less controversial methods could be used? ie. restraint
I'm sure the gun DID hurt, and COULD do damage... but the police warned him several times that if he didn't comply he WOULD get tasered again. He chose not to cooperate... the guy is a moron.
The problem IMO is that too many people feel very much entitled to do what they want, when they want. Who do the library staff and police think they are, requesting him to leave because he doesn't have his ID on him? He'll leave when he damn well wants to... and if, for instance, the police come to escort him out, he's just going to plant his heels into the ground (or lay down) and make as big of a scene as possible.
Everyone thinks they're so freaking entitled these days....
Judging from that video where he just flat out refused but did not attack the officer, do you still stand by the stance of tasering? Considering much better and less controversial methods could be used? ie. restraint
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would modify my statement to "physically resisting", which the last part of my post kinda sorta states.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How difficult would it have been for the student to listen the first (few) times? He was drawing attention and chose to be a drama queen. It's not like the police went out looking for someone to test their taser guns on.
I'm sure the gun DID hurt, and COULD do damage... but the police warned him several times that if he didn't comply he WOULD get tasered again. He chose not to cooperate... the guy is a moron.
...
Everyone thinks they're so freaking entitled these days....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Okay, the first time he did not listen I can still go along with your argument of the guy feeling he's so freaking entitled but when they tasered him it really was unreasonable of them to expect him to immediately get up after the shock. He did say he would leave after they tasered him first, but for some reason the policemen were being freaking impatient and wanted him to leave NOW. Without letting him recover from the first tasering, they demanded that he get out even though he already indicated that he would comply with their order. Then when they did not get their way, they taser him again. Physical limitations of the human body? Pfft, they're police officers with taser guns! They're entitled to your immediate compliance!
I'm sure the gun DID hurt, and COULD do damage... but the police warned him several times that if he didn't comply he WOULD get tasered again. He chose not to cooperate... the guy is a moron.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I always thought Human Rights would cover the fact that it's illegal to taser someone like that? It is rather brutal and unneccessary. People have rights whether they are resisting arrest or not.
I hope that this officer gets fired, these statements are just his feeble attempt to damage control, and stinks of smug arrogance.
Deaths nonwithstanding, the taser is considered the least violent means of physical coercion available to law enforcement, NOT an alternative to firearms. They're meant to be used when the use of physical force is deemed necessary, but when more violent means such as pepper spray, batons or even firearms are deemed inappropriate.
But tasering a prone man who is either unable or unwilling to "get up" is akin to kicking someone who is lying down. It's unnecessary and reeks of sadism.
Again. I invite anyone who thinks that a taser is harmless to go to their local precinct, and request a personal application demonstration of drive-stun tasing. Your opinions will QUICKLY change as to the brutality of the weapon.
How difficult would it have been for the student to listen the first (few) times? He was drawing attention and chose to be a drama queen. It's not like the police went out looking for someone to test their taser guns on.
I'm sure the gun DID hurt, and COULD do damage... but the police warned him several times that if he didn't comply he WOULD get tasered again. He chose not to cooperate... the guy is a moron.
The problem IMO is that too many people feel very much entitled to do what they want, when they want. Who do the library staff and police think they are, requesting him to leave because he doesn't have his ID on him? He'll leave when he damn well wants to... and if, for instance, the police come to escort him out, he's just going to plant his heels into the ground (or lay down) and make as big of a scene as possible.
Everyone thinks they're so freaking entitled these days....
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude, he was on his way out through the door, when one of the cops grabbed hold of his arm. If it had been me there, regardless of other circumstances, and someone had grabbed my arm violently for no reason when I was already doing as they said, I'd have pushed them away and shouted "get the ###### off me" too. The idea that someone would pull out a weapon and use it on me because I told them not to touch me wouldn't even cross my mind.
Cops are supposed to be peace keepers, they are not supposed to discipline people for a lack of respect for authority. That's simply not their job.
Another reason for me to stay away from USA untill people have reacted to the crap that's going on.
Anecdote from the wikipedia article ( <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostafa_Tabatabainejad" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostafa_Tabatabainejad</a> ):
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Terrence Duren, an ex-marine and 18-year veteran of the UCLA Police Department, Tasered Tabatabainejad five times. A 2001 UCLA Officer of the Year, Duren has been the subject of other use-of-force complaints and previously recommended for dismissal.[8] In one previous incident, Duren shot and wounded a homeless man in a University building, a case that went to trial. Duren has stated all of the past allegations against him regarding police misconduct and use of excessive force were investigated by the UCPD and proven false.[9] Prior to joining the UCPD in the late 1980s, Duren was fired from the Long Beach Police Department.[8]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As for "go down to the police station and get tasered," pain and harm are two seperate things. Getting tasered may be more painful than having your arm broken, but it (in almost all cases) does no physical damage. And I'd prefer some pain to spending the next month with my arm in a sling.