The 3 minutes BEFORE the student got tasered @ Kerry's Q&A

page: 3
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


He wouldn't stop screaming because he had the right to ask those questions. So what, now if we ask a question they can't answer, they have the right to remove us?




posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Horrible idea. Will probably get you killed. Better just to take the temporary pain of a taser jolt.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Screaming is not meaningful speech and is thus not constitutionally protected.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


No, it's meant to stop unpredictable, raving loons, and was used in this context on this idiot.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Andrew Meyer, the victim in the video, has a website up with some articles and blogs he has written, and lots of links about the story we are all posting about:

Andew Meyer's Website



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


Okay so what you want us to do is suppress our questions because a senator or politician can't answer it? Maybe in a few years our politicians can pick our president for us, and then heck maybe we can become a dictatorship run country. Well, if you do not fight for your freedom now, you may lose it in the future.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


Have you ever been around a pepper spray discharge? Just being in 2-4 feet of the discharge will be enough to make you want to run away.

Being grabbed by several people, a spray or two would be enough for ANY arm-bar or full-nelson hold on you--and allow you to run like hell.

If they pull guns, then they are using "lethal" weapons in response to a "non lethal" self-defense tactic. Won't look to good in a court of law--especially in this guy's situation where he was clearly being "roughly treated" and quite possibly afraid for his life.

A guy where I live died in a bar because the security took him to the ground and sat/positioned themselves on top of him. He suffocated. You're damn right i'd fear for my LIFE if I had 6 overzealous "rent-a-cops" with a "rambo" attitude twisting and making me feel powerless. What laws have I broken? Social mores? Yes, social laws of "decent behavior" perhaps...

None of this warrants being treated this way.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


I'm just saying that freedom of speech is not a license to act like a lunatic. There are ways to promote meaningful change, the "victim" here wasn't pursuing them.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


I know it is not a license to act like a lunatic, but once those rights are violated by the people who are supposed to protect it, then we have no other choice but to act like lunatics.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist

I'm just saying that freedom of speech is not a license to act like a lunatic. There are ways to promote meaningful change, the "victim" here wasn't pursuing them.


The guy wasn't acting like a "lunatic" (that term is a little far fetched, I would maybe call it distressed and scared) until he was grabbed. He didn't know how he could possibly be grabbed and treated that way for what he did. He obviously contested it, and spoke up about it, since no one else seemed to care in the whole auditorium.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by SpadeofAces
 


He didn't have to get tasered. He was totally given an opportunity to avoid that fate.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   
its sad, but tasers have become a compliance tool so officers dont have to do anything that might untuck their neat little uniforms.

shut up or ill tase you.. get on the ground or ill tase you.. resist arrest and ill tase you.. back up and mind your own business or ill tase you too...

its nothing more than a way to force you into compliance with the threat of severe pain, with minimal effort by over zealous security/police forces.


edit: did anyone actually get the answers kerry gave him while he got zapped?



[edit on 19/9/07 by Obliv_au]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


I disagree. The best way to fight abuses of power is with sane civil disobedience, like what Gandhi did. Going crazy only makes the situation worse.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Obliv_au
 


Would you take away their tasers and advocate a return to wounding shots and nightsticks?



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


He had no opportunity to avoid anything, it was the officer's choice, it was bad judgement, and excessive force! Even if he was being unruly according to the officers, I do not believe a taser had to be used to correct this situation.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Okay, so he leaves then protests, then what? The whole point of that was to show everyone in the auditorium how his rights were being taken away. If he just got up and walked away, he would be a sheep like the rest of the people sitting down.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
reply to post by Obliv_au
 


Would you take away their tasers and advocate a return to wounding shots and nightsticks?


why would they need to use either of them, they had him on the ground and he clearly wasnt getting up.

taser is fine in extreme circumstances, just like capsicum sprays..
but some people are too eager to use them whenever possible just to get compliance on a citizen who was clearly not fighting or throwing punches.

sure he was grandstanding up there, maybe he did deserve to get thrown out of the place - i dunno.. but using it on a passively resistant citizen whos already pinned, just to force more compliance and shut them up is a bit extreme.

he may have been screaming and yelling like a madman, but he wasnt throwing punches or getting ready to swing a knife.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Screaming is not meaningful speech and is thus not constitutionally protected.


Where in the constitution does it say that only MEANINGFUL speech (whatever that is) is protected?? Why do you say it's not constitutionally protected?



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by depth om
I wonder if years down the road, people will get a bullet in the head for doing what he did.



and to add to that

I wonder if years down the road, people will applaud such said response from the police.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SpadeofAces
 


The students do look afraid to move. The guy, IMO, did nothing wrong before he was grabed by to cops. He may have been a little excited when he spoke, but he is a 20ish college student. He gave a short statement and then asked a few questions.
Who decided he should be removed?
At what point was he under arrest?
Will America wake up before its too late?

[edit on 19-9-2007 by corusso]




new topics
top topics
 
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join