UCLA student tasered by UCPD in campus library

I'm sorry, I just can't feel sympathy for this guy.

I live in Chicago. Typically the police here are pretty casual and avoid escalating scenes whenever possible. That is until you act like a jackass and make pointed efforts to give them a hard time when they're just doing their job.

You don't argue with police. You don't give them a hard time. You don't raise your voice towards them. You don't try to ignore their requests or instructions. You don't see how close to the line of 'resisting' those requests or instructions you can get.

In this case, with the info we see so far, this kid was doing exactly the last. He was trying to push just the line and see how LITTLE he could do to comply with their doing their job. His exclaiming about the patriot act makes me inclined to believe his quasi-resistence WAS premeditated.

Sorry, you don't fuck with police. You definitely aren't going to win. The fact that police left and returned with MORE police leads me to believe that the scene before this video was started involved an exchange that REQUIRED MORE POLICE. I really doubt the initial responding officers said, "Hey, let's call some more dudes here and taser the fuck out of this guy! It'll be great".

The level of response must be justified by a few factors. Most of which we can only speculate on...

Actual Threat - the target was a danger to someone at the scene. In my opinion, that is what all these "witnesses" are evaluating. He at no point physically endangered others or the police at the scene.

Perceived Threat - the target of the response creates probable reason to believe that there is some yet unseen threat they pose. This case, perceived threat, is what I believe led to the response.

You have an adult male trespassing in a populated location. He refused to validate his presence. He refused to leave the location, several times. At that point, it must be assumed the man has some MOTIVE for trespassing, refusal to leave upon being informed that his is not allowed to be there implies it was not simply a 'mistake'. He didn't say "Oh, I didn't know it wasn't a public library. Sorry, I'll get my stuff and leave now.". Now, officers (for the sake of public safety) must assume he is intentionally refusing to cease breaking the law and peacefully comply with the requests of police in a timely manner.

You don't fuck with the police. The fact that you disagree with the patriot act does not give you the right to create a perceived danger to citizens and police officers. I don't know about you all, but when someone with a badge and taser gun tell me it's time to leave, I leave.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Malacasta
It only takes 2 people to carry a limp person. God knows how many demos I've been on where those numbers have played out.
The cops were just completely out of control on some hard cock power trip.
What surprises me is that the students didn't even try to stop them.
Things have sure changed in the last 10 years. Maybe it's fear? If so, then that's bloody terrifying.

---

Yeah, a -limp- person. A limp person is someone that won't fight going quietly into that good night, so to speak, and a person shouting at the top of their lungs about an unrelated political agenda - i.e. the Patriot Act - is someone that a police officer would be right in classifying as "probably not going to just go quietly."

Quote:

---

Yeah so this guy thinks to himself...
"I need to get tasered multiple times by the police and have some stranger record it so that I can make known my objection to the PATRIOT act. Let's see... how bout if I stay till after dark in a university library and not show my student ID card, that's bound to work!"

And they say the left-wing wear tin hats.

---

Let's re-frame what you said in a little more plausible language. "Hey, wait. If I trespass onto government property without identification, I can probably get the cops called and make it look like they're fascist American pigs that are just abusing a poor, defenseless Arab." You really think it's implausible that a student "protester" would do something against his physical best interests - lying in traffic, say - in order to communicate a "message", no matter how inane that message may be?

And, for the record, I don't hold that "the left wing" wear hats. Not all of them. Just you.

What I don't understand is why they don't ask students to show their school ID -before- they go into the library. If security is the reason for the random checks, isn't it a lot more secure to make students show their ID before they get inside? In that case, someone like this dude who was carrying on about the Patriot Act or "trying to make himself seem like an oppressed minority" would have no case at all if it wasn't a 'random' check and was instead a check that all students had to perform before gaining access to the library.

Personally, I'm inclined to believe that the student in question (who really was a student of the university campus he was on) was in the library trying to work on some assignment or another. Maybe the reason for his reaction was that he felt targeted by the 'random check' of student ID they were performing in the library.

If he felt slighted by having been asked to show ID and thought he was being targeted and put up a fight, as it's evident he had done, then arrest him for failure to comply or whatever the term is. Handcuff him and arrest him and remove him from the premises. Why is violence at all neccessary in this situation? Okay, we've made the point about how it's hard to make people physically move when they don't want to, which warrented the first zap from the taser. When he was on the ground and unable to stand up, why did they zap him again? I thought the point of tasers were to incapacitate people who pose some kind of threat.

Watching the video a couple times over, I see that the cops do end up lifting him by the arm and dragging him out of the library, and out of the hall. If the end result is having to carry him anyway, why is the repeated zapping required? I also find it weird that the campus police ignored the student requests for their identification and badge numbers, etc, and supposedly went so far as to threaten to taser students who asked them for that information. (Daily Bruin Article)

I think it was Malacasta who raised the question about why none of the students did anything when this was happening, but what could they have been expected to do? Police are the good guys, you're supposed to trust that they're doing the right thing.

My objection to this incident is that the violence did not at all seem proportionate to the scenario in question.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Carrah
My objection to this incident is that the violence did not at all seem proportionate to the scenario in question. [/B]

---

The reason I continue to support the police in this situation is exactly this. Your assumption is exactly opposite of what I think is appropriate in 99.9% of the situations involving the police. You are assuming that there wasn't a reason for them to act.

My first thought is that depsite my less than fun experiences with the police in my life, I've never thought once (usually later, not during the event mind you) that I did not somehow put myself in a position for them to respond to me.

Police who absuse their office, "get their rocks off" on being a pain, or have some sort of inferiority complex is not as common as people think. I mean every night on TV and the like you see corrupt cops, but most of these guys are normal joes who like the idea of being a good guy.

As for the rest of your thoughts, I suspect they do check ID's on the way in. Or they have a swipe card system like they did at three of the four universities I've attend. But regardless, if you look at the time frame for the events, this is 11:30 PM. I suspect secruity is not always perfect and at that hour they know their are higher risks. So asking students at that hour doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Also, a taser does not knock you out. It really is more like a billy club. While I have never been tassed, I was a teenage boy and with fun friends. I've seen it in person. The way it has been described as being kicked in the chest by something. Its more like a baton in the sense it is meant to temporarily (a few seconds) shock the senses. Its a nasty piece of business, but in the end its small burn marks versus bruises and broken bones.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wyden
Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that they tasered his ass to all hell?

---

You sure aren't!

"Don't touch me!"

"Okay." ZAP!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Carrah
I seriously couldn't believe it was campus police who tasered him. Campus police at my university are lucky if they get walkie talkies. :eek

---

Lol, same thing at my college.

He deserved to get tasered. I would taser him myself if I could. I would even have my cop friends hold him down so I could get a clean shot at his balls. I would make sure someone had a camcorder to catch the act as I send a message to all the liberal, whiney, shallow, know-nothing, my-parents-pay-for-everything college retards.

As a general rule I really don't like cops. But I don't like a lot of other people either, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Carrah
What I don't understand is why they don't ask students to show their school ID -before- they go into the library. If security is the reason for the random checks, isn't it a lot more secure to make students show their ID before they get inside? In that case, someone like this dude who was carrying on about the Patriot Act or "trying to make himself seem like an oppressed minority" would have no case at all if it wasn't a 'random' check and was instead a check that all students had to perform before gaining access to the library.

---

Direct quote from the article from the L.A. Times link you posted to begin this thread:

Quote:

---

According to a campus police report, the incident began when community service officers, who serve as guards at the library, began their nightly routine of checking to make sure everyone using the library after 11 p.m. is a student or otherwise authorized to be there.

Campus officials said the long-standing policy was adopted to ensure students' safety.

When Tabatabainejad, 23, refused to provide his ID to the community service officer, the officer told him he would have to show it or leave the library, the report said.

After repeated requests, the officer left and returned with campus police, who asked Tabatabainejad to leave "multiple times," according to a statement by the UCLA Police Department.

"He continued to refuse," the statement said. "As the officers attempted to escort him out, he went limp and continued to refuse to cooperate with officers or leave the building."

---

This indicates several things: first of all, the guy in question wasn't subject to a "random" search or ID request - apparently, it was getting to the mandated hour at which only specific individuals were allowed to remain in the library - i.e. students and authorized personnel. This man did not wish to comply with this rule, which I've no doubt was universally applied. He then refused to leave as per the CSO's (which is a nice way of saying "some kid just doing a work-study job") requests, and THEN, after being informed the POLICE were being called, refused to leave. At VERY MINIMUM, that's two conscious decisions to break the law and remain on property you are not permitted to be on - not counting the fact the CSO probably asked several times.

From this point out, the account diverges. The police say he went limp and refused to move; he, and some students, say that he was walking towards the door until a police officer grabbed him on the arm (I imagine either to guide him out the door/make sure he doesn't make a break for it or to ensure he doesn't leave police custody before getting a citation, warning, or whatever standard operating procedure is). Assuming one of the two accounts is correct, he either:

1) Went limp, intentionally attempting to resist moving, in which case he would likely not be amenable to being handcuffed,

or

2) Started actively physically resisting the officers, in which case, the tasering was completely appropriate.

Do I think he needed to be tasered three or four times to take him out of the building? Probably not. Do I think he deserved it for intentionally making the CSO's life a living hell, making a scene in a public library at near-midnight, trespassing, and so on? You're god damned right he did.

The only - ONLY - unfortunate part about what the police did here is that they didn't (ostensibly) attempt to use handcuffs or some other form of restraint first, in order to prevent the tide of public opinion from swelling en masse in favor of this little thug. I also identify that it is far easier to make a retrospective call on someone else's judgment from the comfort of my laptop, without a small crowd of assembling (hostile) students and a screaming, violent suspect on my hands. Was what the officers did perfect? No. Was it reasonable? Absolutely - and that's all one can expect from law enforcement personnel.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Savaric
He deserved to get tasered. I would taser him myself if I could. I would even have my cop friends hold him down so I could get a clean shot at his balls. I would make sure someone had a camcorder to catch the act as I send a message to all the liberal, whiney, shallow, know-nothing, my-parents-pay-for-everything college retards.

---

Savaric, next time you think you're contributing to the "conservative" side of the discussion, don't bother. You're not doing us any favors.

My bad. I thought I'd read that it was a random check due to the late hour. Maybe one of the earlier articles had put that before they had more deetz.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaviani
Savaric, next time you think you're contributing to the "conservative" side of the discussion, don't bother. You're not doing us any favors.

---

Are my posts too colorful? I'm sorry- I didn't mean to fall out of line. I'll try to make posts that don't step on anyone's toes.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, and I'm not in the habit of performing favors for certain sides.