OMG I just had a freaking two page response written out here, but I somehow deleted it all. I am sooo pissed off right now. Rather than retype it all let me just say this: The cops are here to protect and serve us. The cops in this situation were way out of line. The fat cop sitting on the kid had a smile on his face moments before they tased the kid. The cops also have protocols for situations like this. They escalate the amount of force until they reach the amount necessary to subdue the person. THEY HAD HIM PINNED DOWN. At this point all cops know it is not necessary to tase someone (they are technically supposed to use an armbar or other prohibitive technique at this point - according to protocol). If they had tased him while he was still on his feet resisting arrest this would have been justifiable (not ideal), but instead they waited until he was pinned down, there were at least 4 cops around, and 'till he was begging not to be tased. I mean come on. Where is the justice in this country when the people that are supposed to protect us are acting just like the people that want to oppress us. HERE IS THE REAL PROBLEM: COMPLACENCY. This guy had legitimate intentions, and he brought his questions to a Q and A. We are all becoming sheep waiting to be sheared when we sit by and let this kind of oppression occur. Look at the Bush Speech where a couple was arrested for shirts with the word "Bush" crossed out. On the back of the shirts one said "Love America, Hate Bush". The other said "Regime Change Starts At Home". The secret service moved in and arrested the couple, despite the fact that they hadn't said anything. So what happened to this couple that was wronged? Well the government knew they were wrong so they gave them 80,000$ and dropped charges. BUT, in a classic responsibility evasion maneuver, the government denied that they were out of line:
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/wireStory?id=3489979
"White House spokesman Blair Jones said the settlement was not an admission of wrongdoing.
"The parties understand that this settlement is a compromise of disputed claims to avoid the expenses and risks of litigation and is not an admission of fault, liability, or wrongful conduct," Jones said. " - ABC NEWS
Even more importantly than denying that they were out of line, the government did not allow this to go to trial because of our justice system. Much of our law is determined by common law, basically meaning precedence. If the government was proved to be in violation of prohibiting the first ammendment in this case, it would have been a landmark case in support of the first ammendment. By paying out the couple and dropping charges (and i'm sure with a little coaxing), the issue got pushed under the rug and forgotten about.
Back to the topic: This kid had a right to ask his questions. This kid had a right to ask why he was being arrested. This kid had a right to be free. We cannot condone the actions of the police in this issue because this has become all too commonplace. More and more civil liberties are eroded daily by the blind acceptance of the actions of "authority" figures. In order to be free we must question everything we perceive, and we must always be leary of authority.
To say that the cops are always saviours is incorrect. Sure they save lives sometimes, that's in their job description. But I can tell you from the Police ride-alongs I took when I wanted to become an officer that saving lives is far from their daily job description. Making routine traffic stops, ticketing, and chasing drugs is usually what they do. I have spoken to more officers than I care to remember and none of them had actually prevented someone from dying. Don't get me wrong, police are necessary and do much good. There are undoubtedly situations that arise where a cop saves lives, but this is what makes the news. I remember asking this one veteran cop how long it would take for police to come to my house (I live in suburbia with cops everywhere) if I made an emergency call at night (like someone breaking in). He told me to get a gun because response time is around 10 minutes. So yea, you might know someone who has been saved by a cop before, but chances are someone can break into your house, rape you, make a sandwich, and steal your CP's before the cops come. Yes that was a joke, don't take it too seriously. The majority of police are virtuous and noble in their cause, but in this case these officers got out of hand.
Please do not condone the actions of the police in this case because one day it could be you fighting for what you believe in. Would you really want someone to humiliate you (rousted him), shut you up (turned off his mic), pin you down and sit on you (while smiling), hear your pleas (still while smiling), and then taser you for a few seconds? To Protect and To Serve.
-Daniel
P.S. My original post was much more articulated and better written, but I mashed 3 magical buttons together and it all dissappeared. I went into the protocols of police conduct and for the record, tasing was not justified in this case. The next step in protocol would be to subdue the man through a physical technique. Tasing is actually high up on the list in protocol because of past incidents with people dying by taser. At least in San Diego that's how it is.