Cops brutally taze protester, then turn on the man filming it - Polidicks

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877741]The specific right to force protesters off land for no reason other than "I don't like it" is not something I think is justifiable. You've got a strange moral judgement system. Is that why I can jerk it in walmart and not be considered in public? Its private property! Yup.[/QUOTE] So by your words people aren't trespassing on my property and I can't do anything about it because they're 'protesting' on my property without my permission. TRESPASS: 1. enter the owner's land or property without permission. This can and will get you arrested. PERIOD.

[QUOTE=Lv100Garchomp;46877774]So by your words people aren't trespassing on my property and I can't do anything about it because they're 'protesting' on my property without my permission. TRESPASS: 1. enter the owner's land or property without permission. This can and will get you arrested. PERIOD.[/QUOTE] No no no, he's saying that in his naive world view that it SHOULDN'T be punishable. He's an 'anarcho-communist' (read: someone that doesn't own property and hates people that do) and doesn't agree with private property.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877781]No no no, he's saying that in his naive world view that it SHOULDN'T be punishable. He's an 'anarcho-communist' (read: someone that doesn't own property and hates people that do) and doesn't agree with private property.[/QUOTE] I read his arguments. I still don't understand them. That's the only reply I'm giving to him.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877772]you do see them refuse to leave because they're standing there arguing with the cops when told to leave. [/QUOTE] I watched the video, they just gather up around this guy and take him down, there is no dialog.... I do NOT see anyone refuse to leave at all, also how can you leave when you are surrounded by police? You are ignoring everything. Also you ignored what I said about them begining to taze the man after he had fallen to the ground and began beating him, you are obviously against personal freedoms like protesting or want police to have ultimate power over citizens(Which they already have for the most part). Well I do no want those things and these cops are in the wrong period. Again, how can they leave when surrounded on every side by police personel, plain clothe officers at that!!!!!!!! [QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877772] It's all in the article if you bothered to read it.[/QUOTE] I did read the article, but I also watched the video which shows police abusing their power and that is a much bigger deal.

[QUOTE=Fort83;46877782]Resisting arrest is a crime, so how about you think about that again.[/QUOTE] but you can't arrest someone without a reason

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;46877688]Why are we discussing this instead of the cameraman being wrongfully arrested. This current argument is literally a communist and a I don't fucking know arguing about who owns the property.[/QUOTE] The cameraman was given a legitimate order to leave (because trespassing) 3 times while he was filming and did not comply with these orders. Therefore he was arrested. As I've said already, that he was near his car is irrelevant. He was not getting in the car and complying with the order to leave. The police did not come for him because he was filming, they did not destroy his video or attempt to do so, the whole arrest was over his trespass therefore there is no issue and nothing to talk about.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46877798]I watched the video, they just gather up around this guy and take him down, there is no dialog.... I do NOT see anyone refuse to leave at all, also how can you leave when you are surrounded by police? You are ignoring everything. Also you ignored what I said about them begining to taze the man after he had fallen to the ground and began beating him, you are obviously against personal freedoms like protesting or want police to have ultimate power over citizens(Which they already have for the most part). Well I do no want those things and these cops are in the wrong period. Again, how can they leave when surrounded on every side by police personel, plain clothe officers at that!!!!!!!![/QUOTE] Read the article. No one beat him. They were simply trying to get handcuffs on him. He fought against it, which required that they tase him to forcibly relax his muscles

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877764]Actually, a place like Walmart is considered "Common Property" which is basically private property that acts as a public place. All stores are considered "Common property" regardless of how they're owned (by an individual, by a trust, by a board, by shareholders, etc) - Basically, Common Property is private property with public access available either 24/7 or on a certain set schedule. Common Property must have basic amenities for the public, some 100% mandatory (wheelchair accessible) others based on size/volume/type of business (public restrooms) but are protected by the same laws as individually owned private property (i.e. trespass laws, right to privacy, etc)[/QUOTE] I can't believe you think a landowner's right to control property is greater than the right to life or justice. I'm literally baffled. [QUOTE=catbarf;46877769]Wow it's almost like our legal system recognizes the concept of publicly-accessible private property, and furthermore defines some crimes based on public [i]visibility[/i] (eg exposing yourself on private property is illegal if it's readily visible [i]from public property[/i]), even while recognizing that private property is distinct from public property? Like seriously by your definition what does private property even mean if anyone else can do whatever they want to it as long as they insist they're following nebulous definitions of protest?[/QUOTE] Exactly my point. Protest is a PUBLIC event because of its visibility. Saying its a private event is just silly. Protesting =/= whatever they want. Destruction of property, endangering others, ect is an entirely different set of laws. [QUOTE=Lv100Garchomp;46877774]So by your words people aren't trespassing on my property and I can't do anything about it because they're 'protesting' on my property without my permission. TRESPASS: 1. enter the owner's land or property without permission. This can and will get you arrested. PERIOD.[/QUOTE] oh ffs, I'm not saying that its legal in current law, I'm saying that it SHOULD be.

[QUOTE=Fort83;46877801]The whole reason for the police to be there was because they took the protest inside Walmart, which is trespassing on private property unless Walmart gave them consent. Not complying with officers when you are under arrest is resisting arrest. [/QUOTE] What does this have to do with anything? I dont care why the police were there, I care what the police did once they arrived, abuse power. The camera man was 100% complying with officers and still was accosted... [QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877811]Read the article. No one beat him. They were simply trying to get handcuffs on him. He fought against it, which required that they tase him to forcibly relax his muscles[/QUOTE] I know you are not serious with your posts, the video shows him being attacked, I do not need an article to tell me what my eyes see, you seem to believe that because the article says he was not beaten that its true, when there is a video showing it happen..... wow.....

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877813]I can't believe you think a landowner's right to control property is greater than the right to life or justice. I'm literally baffled. [highlight]A property owner's right to dictate the course of their own property trumps the freedom of speech. This is clearly outlined in our constitution. The only thing you should be baffled about is your persistent and continued disregard for common sense and common knowledge in pursuit of a wholly undesired sociopolitical system.[/highlight] Exactly my point. Protest is a PUBLIC event because of its visibility. Saying its a private event is just silly. [highlight]As such, it has no place in a private residence or privately owned business.[/highlight] Protesting =/= whatever they want. Destruction of property, endangering others, ect is an entirely different set of laws. [highlight]What you're looking for is "Peaceful Protest" because sure as shit, protests can turn violent and they're still called protests. Regardless they have no place in private property regardless of the message, its mode of delivery, or the type of property it is.[/highlight] oh ffs, I'm not saying that its legal in current law, I'm saying that it SHOULD be. [highlight]No, it should not.[/highlight][/QUOTE]

Alright guys, I hate to leave debates, but I gotta go. Message me if you want to continue sometime or talk about something. It was fun!

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877813]I can't believe you think a landowner's right to control property is greater than the right to life or justice. I'm literally baffled. [/QUOTE] how in the hell does telling someone to leave your property infringe on their right to life (???) or justice? [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877861]Alright guys, I hate to leave debates, but I gotta go. Message me if you want to continue sometime or talk about something. It was fun![/QUOTE] "I have no idea what the hell I am talking about so I'm going to leave to save face" -literally every anarchist ever

[QUOTE=Fort83;46875096]It's better to just comply with the police instead of arguing with them, which some will take arguing as resisting arrest, and then take legal action afterwards. Damn though it was not necessary for those cops to taser the guy. And fuck that cop that took down the camera guy for not moving fast enough, didn't even give him 5 seconds.[/QUOTE] You should have the right to argue with police without being fucking tazed.

[QUOTE=mrpirate;46877919]You should have the right to argue with police without being fucking tazed.[/QUOTE] You have every right to argue with a cop when he tells you to get off property that you've been trespassed from. Just expect to get arrested, and when you resist that arrest, expect to get tazed.

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877813]Exactly my point. Protest is a PUBLIC event because of its visibility. Saying its a private event is just silly.[/QUOTE] This is exactly the point that everyone else has been making and you keep blithely missing it. It's a PUBLIC event. So it can be on PUBLIC property, or on private property WITH PERMISSION. I can not go into your living room and host a concert, food drive, political rally, farmer's market, or any other PUBLIC event (including protests!) without permission. They are PUBLIC events that can be freely practiced on PUBLIC property. This is not a difficult concept. The definition of PRIVATE property is that it is not freely for use by the PUBLIC. [QUOTE=soccerskyman;46877813]Protesting =/= whatever they want. Destruction of property, endangering others, ect is an entirely different set of laws.[/QUOTE] Oh, why's that? I mean, you're already saying that the right to free speech trumps the right to be left the hell alone in your home, so what other rights supercede others? Why can't I say that scrawling graffiti all over the inside of your home is an expression of my free speech?

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46877930]You have every right to argue with a cop when he tells you to get off property that you've been trespassed from. Just expect to get arrested, and when you resist that arrest, expect to get tazed.[/QUOTE] Yes but i don't see how you can justify using a tazer on a person that isn't using violence against you. Restisting arrest is not violence. [QUOTE=Fort83;46877951]After you get arrested is the best time to argue about it, during will only cause more trouble. It can be seen as resisting arrest.[/QUOTE] Yes i agree, but that dosn't justify using violence on a non-violent person. Edit: This is a huge cultural difference it seems. Here is a laugh for americans: in Denmark there is no punishment for trying to run/drive away from police. You only get punished if you commit other crimes meanwhile.

There was very little talking, they just attack this guy, then they attack the guy filming. Basically 100% non violent protestors were attacked by a bunch of cops, very lame and anti freedom. Theres a part in the video when the man being attacked is screaming at the top of his lungs in pain, this is not how you arrest someone.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46877976]There was very little talking, they just attack this guy, then they attack the guy filming. Basically 100% non violent protestors were attacked by a bunch of cops, very lame and anti freedom. Theres a part in the video when the man being attacked is screaming at the top of his lungs in pain, this is not how you arrest someone.[/QUOTE] Well america has slipped pretty far down the freedom index.

[QUOTE=mrpirate;46877945]Yes but i don't see how you can justify using a tazer on a person that isn't using violence against you. Restisting arrest is not violence.[/QUOTE] Resisting arrest is failure to obey a directive given by a peace officer. Both of which are a crime, which warrants the use of a taser to end the resisting. One does not have to be violent to warrant being tased. If you do not obey a cop, you will be tased. Don't want to get tased? Obey the damn cops.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46878161]Resisting arrest is failure to obey a directive given by a peace officer. Both of which are a crime, which warrants the use of a taser to end the resisting. One does not have to be violent to warrant being tased. If you do not obey a cop, you will be tased. Don't want to get tased? Obey the damn cops.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying it is illegal, i'm saying it's imoral.

And to everyone here saying that this is police brutality or it was unnecessary, here's a complete rundown of the video clip. The cops did not use excessive force. They gave both men ample time to say "Alright, we're leaving" and do so. Instead they continue to run their mouths and even went so far as to resist arrest. It was not a "brutal" or "excessive" tasering, the man was tasered for 5 seconds or less over the span of 30 seconds. If anything, the police were lenient with it. I've seen other cops tase people resisting in a similar fashion for a full 5-10 seconds at a time. [quote]Cop 1: You've been criminally trespassed from this property Guy 1: Can I see your ID please? Cop 1: No, you can't [highlight]Note: At this point, I feel the need to point out that cops are not obligated to show their ID, only recite their name and/or serial # IF they are in uniform - If they're working plainclothes (like cop 1) they are not obligated to give this information either[/highlight] Guy 1: (raises voice) Why, why is there something <unintelligible> - You gotta have probable cause to ask someone <unintelligible> (The probable cause was Walmart trespassed them from their store) Cop 1: This man needs to go to jail (Fully acceptable considering Guy 1 is not complying with a lawful request to vacate the property) Cop 2: Alright, that works. <He approaches Guy 1 in an attempt to handcuff him, Guy 1 holds his arms stiff against his side in an attempt to prevent this. This is resisting arrest.) Guy 2: (Cameraman) Wow, he need to go to jail for criminal trespassing! Cop 2: Hey, come give me a hand (to other cops, presumably) Cops 1, 2, and 3 then at this point attempt to put Guy 1's hands behind his back to handcuff him, all the while Guy 1 is resisting his arrest. Peacefully or not, he is resisting a lawful arrest from a peace officer. Cop 1: Take him down. Taze him, taze him. (Standard procedure in an incident of resisting arrest. Tazing someone that is actively resisting being arrested reduces the chance of them injuring themselves or a cop) Guy 2: Taze him?! Cops 2, 3, and 4 finally bring the man to the ground by (appears to be gently) buckling his knees. At this point you can see Guy 1 is struggling against the officers now, not just peacefully refusing to be arrested. It is at this point one of the officers tazes him for approximately 3 seconds, pauses, then tazes him against for an additional 1 second while Guy 1 continues to actively struggle and kick his legs. One of the officers instructs Guy 2 to back up calmly. He does not touch him, he merely holds his flashlight out sideways and walks towards him in an effort to make him back away. Guy 2 complies. After about 15-30 seconds, they tase Guy 1 a third time for one second after he fails to comply with a command to put his hands on the ground. Note that Guy 1's yelling/screaming begins before the taser, and is thus not a product of being tased. At this point he begins verbally abusing the officers. Cop 1 approaches Guy 1 Cop 1: Y'all part of this protest? (No response from Guy 2) You need to leave. You need to leave right now or you can go with him, leave right now or go with him. (Guy 2 makes no visible indication he is complying with what is a lawful order from a peace officer to vacate the premisis) Guy 2 takes a few steps to the right while keeping his camera on his friend in what appears to be an attempt to look around the officers blocking his view. He gives no indication that the vehicle he is approaching is his or that he intends to leave, and has said nothing to the officers telling him to do so. Cop: Let's go! Go! (Guy 2 does not move, he says "Woah man" and the officers presumably begin to arrest him at this point for failure to obey the commands of a peace officer and criminal trespassing. He gives absolutely no indication that the vehicle is his until he is arrested, and does not state he was planning on leaving. The video cuts here.[/quote] This is once again a case of a media outlet overly sensationalizing what is otherwise a run of the mill arrest.

[QUOTE=opaali;46877770]resisting arrest is a good reason to arrest someone? think about that again[/QUOTE] Thought about it again and still concluded that not only you can get charged with it AND that officers are within the law to use force to gain compliance.

You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46878161]Resisting arrest is failure to obey a directive given by a peace officer. Both of which are a crime, which warrants the use of a taser to end the resisting. One does not have to be violent to warrant being tased. If you do not obey a cop, you will be tased. Don't want to get tased? Obey the damn cops.[/QUOTE] [B]RESISTING ARREST, SEARCH, OR TRANSPORTATION. [/B] - (a) A person commits an offense if he [U]intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from effecting an arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using force against the peace officer or another.[/U] No. You're wrong, Snoberry. A tazer is not a tool you use to punish people. It is not a compliance tool. Its intention was a substitute for deadlyforce.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46879705]You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.[/QUOTE] You must be watching a different video then, because in the one I saw, the cop told him he was getting arrested and instead of putting his hands behind his back or complying, he tried to argue with them about the basis of his arrest, which is resisting arrest. Also, they weren't complying with everything the police said. If they had, they wouldn't have been around TO get arrested.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46879705]You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.[/QUOTE] I'm not going to say a 7min video shows the entire encounter because you, me, and everyone else knows it doesnt.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46879705]You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.[/QUOTE] Yea because people filming always capture the entire thing, and don't just start recording most of the time when they think it's going to get "interesting" or when they think they are about to have their "rights violated". The video doesn't give anywhere near enough context to judge the legality of the arrests; for all we know the police have been there for hours trying to get the protesters to leave. Seeing as there was a lot of cops already there, it seems very unlikely that the police had just gotten there when this video was recorded.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46879705]You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.[/QUOTE] Dude what I posted was literally a word-for-word transcription. I watched the video like 10 times to make sure I caught everything. So if you have "no idea" what I'm talking about you either didn't even watch the video or you're so filled with blind rage that you're disregarding what actually happened just to make an argument. [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Suff;46879761][B]RESISTING ARREST, SEARCH, OR TRANSPORTATION. [/B] - (a) A person commits an offense if he [U]intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from effecting an arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using force against the peace officer or another.[/U] No. You're wrong, Snoberry. A tazer is not a tool you use to punish people. It is not a compliance tool. Its intention was a substitute for deadlyforce.[/QUOTE] [quote]In some countries, resisting arrest is a criminal charge against an individual who has committed, depending on the jurisdiction, at least one of the following acts: fleeing a police officer while being arrested threatening a police officer with physical violence while being arrested physically struggling to free onesself from being restrained (handcuffed or put into the police vehicle) attacking a police officer while being arrested providing an officer with false identification (either verbally or by presentation of a false official document, i.e. a fake ID)[/quote] He performed #3. Physically struggling to free onesself from being restrained. And no, I'm not wrong. A taser (Taser, not Tazer. It stands for [b]T[/b]homas [b]A[/b]. [b]S[/b]wift [b]E[/b]lectric [b]R[/b]ifle) is a method of enforcing law enforcement procedures without the use of deadlier or more harmful alternatives such as a gun, nightstucks, truncheons, tear gas, pepper spray, or mace.

[QUOTE=Etschew;46879705]You can watch the video for yourself, they did not have a conversation "Can I see you ID please? :)" They literally just grabbed this guy and whooped his ass, then to make sure no one could see it they attacked the guy filming, who until then had complied with everything the police asked, in fact they were right near the mans car trying to leave if you watch the video all the evidence is there, I have no idea what Snoberry Tea and Fort83 are talking about. You can continue to change the subject to talking about why resisting arrest is illegal, etc etc etc, but the truth is that what went down was wrong.[/QUOTE] Uh, yeah they had a conversation, did you watch the video?