Don’t Taze Me, Bro! – the Video Game Version

A freelance game artist and programmer has designed a video game which explores concerns over the excessive use of force by police.


Jason Rohrer writes in The Escapist that he was moved to create Police Brutality after viewing the famous Don’t taze me, bro! incident in which a student was tasered by police while Sen. John Kerry gave a speech at the University of Florida.


Of his game design, Rohrer writes:



The video reminded me of how scary police can be… I’m not suggesting that the UF students should have physically attacked the police. …Perhaps they should have done some quick, ad hoc organizing. Perhaps they should have collectively stood up to the police in some kind of non-violent, legal way.


Even if the students could organize on the spot, I wasn’t sure what the most effective strategy would be. I designed a game to explore the possibilities. Police Brutality is a game about fear, collective motivation, ad hoc organizing, self-sacrifice, and non-violence…


 

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

60 comments

  1. 0
    Keegs79 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    This is stupid. I just want to comment by saying that I dont need politics and crap in gaming. It is bad enough hollywood is making political movies on a daily basis. Entertainment should first and foremost be for fun. I dont care how good the message something brings in movies or games.

  2. 0
    F**ked Up says:

    Just because its fast doesnt mean it safe. We all know tasers are very safe. Ask the polish man in canada.

    Really you dont have to threaten an officer to be consider dangerous? well that somewhat true maybe you threaten a non-police officer to be considered dangerous. But if you dont have to threaten someone to be consider dangerous I guess that the excuse they used to shoot minorities in low income areas.  I m afraid that next time i pull out my wallet it might be mistaken for a gun, or a remote control, or a spatula, or a GTA.

    You fail to see the similarites i have pointed out earlier. I feel as though I am repeating myself over and over again.  Please explain how they are spurious? They have more similaries than you can see. http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/116786/Video_Man_Tased_For_Refusing_to_Sign_Speeding_Ticket

    Nope I believe that people who are in position of power better hold themselves to higher standards than the people "below" them. If they show they are incapible of being wield such power then should not have it. I am cynical of humans espcially those in power since they are well human, fallible creatures. But I do know some people are capable of holding themselves to that higher standard. Lately I have been finding police are no longer holding themselves to the higher standard. If they are going to act like humans then they should not be called police officers.

    No they did not do everything by procedure. And I know full well procedure doesnt always work for every situation they have to use their best judgement depending on the situation at hand. In this case they failed. They didnt need to taser, it might have taken longer to get him into handcuffs. Just because its faster doent make it better. Just because they say it safe doesnt really mean it is.

  3. 0
    Grendal says:

    And you appear to be missing the point that he was still resisting while on the grounds, the fastest and safeest way to subdue the subject was to taze him. You also quite nicely side step the fact were I say that you do not need to directly threaten or strike or attempt to strike a police officer to be considered dangerous. You also seem to really like to make spurious comparisons, we are not talking about traffic tickets or streaking or anything else, we are talking about actively resisting arrest. Also what the hell does rodney king have to do with this in any way?

    Look I see that you want to beleive that all police are evil power-mongers that only wish to cause pain and physical harm. What you are ignoring however is that they followed the correct procedures in this case, they did everything they were supposed to do to subdue an unreuly individual who was resisting arrest, while causing the minimum amount of injury.

  4. 0
    Vladimir Putin says:

     Andrew Meyer, in disrupting the speech of a major political figure, was a clear and present danger to the functioning of the event.  In my opinion, the police did not go far enough.  Tasing merely incapacitates, and Meyer could still speak and attract attention.  They should have shot him and anybody that came to his aid.

     

    Long live Mother Russia.

  5. 0
    F**ked up says:

    You are allowed to argue with the police office as far as you do it in a "civil" manner. Usually this arguement appears in the forms of questioning. The police officer questions you and you give him a response essentally arguing your case. When being questioned by a police officer over speeding and getting a J-walking ticket you are essentially arguing your case. If this was not the case, they would just hand you a ticket and be on their way. There would be really no need for questioning besides any information they need to write the ticket and no one would be able argue their way out of a speeding ticket.

    So he wasnt complying, thats a given but did it really need to involve a taser? NO. Simple they had him subdued on the ground. They were struggling with him to get the handcuffs on. Did they need to taser him just to put handcuffs on? No. I have seen the police officers and masscots at Football games takedown and handcuff the crowd member that runs on to a field do a better job. They dont have to taser those people why do they have to taser him? because he is a Jackass? Then I hope that you dont find a police officer that thinks your a Jackass.

    Yes and watching the video over and over again this guy made numerous threats of violence both verbally and physically that warrent the officers to use a taser. /scarasm

    Yes and the police officer should know when to draw the appropriate weapon depending on the situation.

    Ahh yes the right to protest, go through the proper channels. And I remember that Civility fails when people in power stop being civil and when its used as a form of oppression. Besides they gave him a chance. It was Q & A session with John Kerry, an Open Forum, was he protesting? No. He as just on a rant. So there really is no protest.

  6. 0
    Steven Schaeffer says:

     

    You are not legally allowed to argue with a police officer for a ticket. Any protest or denial should be made at the appropriate venue. Engaging an officer in an argument is grounds for an insubordination and possible resisting arrest charge. Police are trained to give a person not engaged in a situation of immediate threat the opportunity to comply with verbal requests before resorting to force. Acceptable levels of force are usually in direct ratio to level of perceived or possible resistance or threat posed.

    For instance, a J-walker caught in the act of crossing an empty road is not posing an acceptable threat to the safety of police officers or civilians to warrant force. Changing the scenario changes the possible threat and thusly the acceptability of force. Add to the possibility innocent bystanders, a political motorcade, refusal to comply and physical assault on authorities and force may be necessary. Notice my usage of the word "May."

    There are many factors and legal caveats that a police officer faces when a weapon of any kind is drawn. To best protect the rights of a suspect and to protect their own standing on the proper side of the laws of the United States police officers give aforementioned warnings to those facing weapons or physical restraint. In this case video evidence clearly shows the many warnings given the assailant, and his refusal to comply or submit. 
     
    In the United States a person has the right to protest, assuming he has undergone the proper channels to organize as granted by the Bill of Rights. Historically those in the process of protesting have faced the usage of force ranging from fire hoses and dog attacks all the way to machine gun fire. Give me a Taser to the chest any day – though any civil disobedience I engage in will be as part of a properly organized unit that is not in violation of the law and not infringing on the rights of others, so I doubt I will be seeing any sparks.
  7. 0
    Zanduar says:

    The police’s actions were not excessive. In order to remove someone they first took steps to calm him and remove him politely. The only "force" they used was the actual tazing and lifting the student out of the room.

    The person who was tazed, went there that day to make a scene. Before the tazer was ever pulled out he begun shouting "Don’t taze me bro!" His actions led to the incident. The officers didn’t encite him to act violently and they didn’t act violently themselves.

    Police often abuse their power but it did not happen in this case. If the student had left politely after his outburst, there would have been no problem. He could have even gone kicking and screaming, he was intentionally causing a distruption so it makes sense. Rather he rooted himself to the spot and wouldn’t move.

    He wasn’t even protesting anything. Sit ins, hunger strikes, etc. are all peaceful ways to bring light to a problem. All this student wanted to do was to cause problems.

    P.S. No I don’t support Kerry.

  8. 0
    Zanduar says:

    BTW, yes the actions of the police do seem extravagent but that is because the only audio you can hear is the student shouting.

    None of the audience stood up to help him.

    Kerry didn’t come down and stop him.

    Is society that callous or is it that they saw the situation as one student being being obnoxious.

    WACO, The Patriot Act, etc. we must look at these situations before getting worked up about an unruly frat boy.

  9. 0
    NecroSen ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    The game’s too easy. You can win every time with the following:

    1. Move the guy down one block.

    2. Do a knight’s move two blocks up and one block right so the guy ends up in the seats.

    3. Click the shout button and make it cover the entire room.

    The “You Win” box pops up in about two seconds.

  10. 0
    Mnementh2230 says:

    Regarding the original “Don’t taze me” incident…  I think the police should have just picked up him and carted him out.  He was being a prick, but he was protesting non-violently.

    Besides, if the police had ANY IDEA of what they were doing when subduing him, it would only take one guy to remove him from the area.  ONE.

  11. 0
    f**Ked up says:

    Why does he need to put distance between him and the officers maybe because he was their to prove a point. to create the attention he wanted? Does that mean he should be tasered? No. So the next time we see someone jump on to the football field to streak should he be tasered? If they handled it like this situation they would have been fine.

    They should have already known he was a prankster as soon as he got on the mic. He was being rude and being a jackass but that doesnt mean he should be tasered. He did not say nothing or give any physical indication of committing physical harm. I see you avoid this part.

    Here is the fact that you keeps missing

    he was already in a subdued position before being tasered. He was pinned to the ground by what looked like 3-4 officers with one officer being at least twice the size and weight of the person in question. 2 officer were holding down his upper body and head, as they should have been trained while the 3 officer applies the handcuffs. That was the tactic they used before they had tasers. And it should have been done here. No need for the taser to be involved.

    It kind of has a some reminance of Rodney king? Saying rodney king was not corporating with police officers so they decide to what hit him 14 -18 time with a night stick. except in this case there were 5 officers not 3, more context as to how the person was taken into custody was provided, and they used a taser not a night stick. And dont argue about whether or not a night stick or taser is better to use. thats not the point. The point is whether these tools needed to be implement and the answer is no. Althought I have taught how to use a night stick to subdue (execute some form of a pin, or leverage hold) people without actually hitting them so, there is another option.

  12. 0
    f**Ked up says:

    Why does he need to put distance between him and the officers maybe because he was their to prove a point. to create the attention he wanted? Does that mean he should be tasered? No. So the next time we see someone jump on to the football field to streak should he be tasered? If they handled it like this situation they would have been fine.

    They should have already known he was a prankster as soon as he got on the mic. He was being rude and being a jackass but that doesnt mean he should be tasered. He did not say nothing or give any physical indication of committing physical harm. I see you avoid this part.

    Here is the fact that you keeps missing

    he was already in a subdued position before being tasered. He was pinned to the ground by what looked like 3-4 officers with one officer being at least twice the size and weight of the person in question. 2 officer were holding down his upper body and head, as they should have been trained while the 3 officer applies the handcuffs. That was the tactic they used before they had tasers. And it should have been done here. No need for the taser to be involved.

    It kind of has a some reminance of Rodney king? Saying rodney king was not corporating with police officers so they decide to what hit him 14 -18 time with a night stick. except in this case there were 5 officers not 3, more context as to how the person was taken into custody was provided, and they used a taser not a night stick. And dont argue about whether or not a night stick or taser is better to use. thats not the point. The point is whether these tools needed to be implement and the answer is no. Althought I have taught how to use a night stick to subdue (execute some form of a pin, or leverage hold) people without actually hitting them so, there is another option.

  13. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    C’mon, if I’m holding a fucking tazer and a guy says “Don’t taze me bro!”, well…you know what I’m gonna do.

    -GRIZZAM PRIME(c)is property of the U.S. Marine Corp. Wetworks Dept., and also The Incredible Hulk-GRIZZAM PRIME is not to be associated with GRIZZAM 512 or any other GRIZZAM entity under penalty of law, so sayith ZARATHOS.

  14. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    What civil outrage was here there “protesting”?  He went there to be an ass, plain and simple, and nothing Kerry would have done would have prevented him from accomplishing his mission.  No amount of leadership would have matter to this guy because he wasn’t asking a question.  He didn’t go there for answers.  He went there to create a scene.  To be the news.  Well, he got it.  He wouldn’t have listened to the event organizers telling him his time was up.  He didn’t listen to them when they cut of his mike, perhaps the best indication his time is up, and he certainly didn’t listen to the police when they told him his time was up.  He had to be forcibly removed.  Which is exactly what he wanted.

    You don’t get arrested for speeding. You aren’t comparing apples to apples.  You don’t get arrested for speeding if you get caught speeding in the same place an hour later.  You say that they “remove you from the area” you are, in fact, under arrest.  Just because they don’t process you doesn’t mean that you are under arrest.  And when you resist that command to leave the area, guess what, they get to use force to detain and remove you.  They don’t do that when you are spotted for speeding.  Depending on the state you don’t even have to sign the ticket.

    You still managed to avoid the important aspect of this situation.  Once this fellow has decided he isn’t going to leave without force what were the options left to the police?  Or the event organizers?  Or even Kerry?  He wasn’t going to leave without being forced out.  So they can either beat him into submission, which is far more likely to cause long term damage and even death, or use the Tazer.  They can’t use chemical methods in a crowd and there really are no other options.

    Pretending that Kerry or someone else could have used some sort of leadership skills to get him to shut up and move along is pretending that Take Two can use some sort of leadership skills to get JT to shut up and move along.  It’s a naive understanding of how the world works at the very least and, at worst, not understanding that some people just aren’t going to leave any other way than kicking and screaming.

  15. 0
    Kaiselius says:

    Wasn’t he asked to leave because he was being disruptive, then him refusing to leave and the continuation of his behaviour which then lead to the officers having to forcably remove him which led up to said tazing after he refused to cooperate.

  16. 0
    Grendal says:

    You do not assume someone who is jumping around and deliberatly resisting attempts at restraint is non-violent. Deliberatly breaking an officers restraint is a pretty conducive possibilty of violence. After all if he had no intention of commiting violence why would he need to put distance between himself and the officers? He didn’t intend to commit violence of course, he was just a jackass, but the given assumption if someone is not following the orders given by an officer is that they are dangerous.

    Also how exactly do we reach this “So therefore given the context their was no act of harmful violence that would have been committed. ” I mean your presumption is that because it was a college campus then it is impossible for violence to be commited. I think recent history proves that pretty obviously false. A cop isn’t going to assume a person jumping around and resisting arrest is just a prankster, that assumtion puts them and everyone else in the area in danger. He did not follow the orders of the police, he got tased because he did not. All he had to do was either go with the cops, or like I said go limp. He chose to resist arrest he suffered the consequences.

  17. 0
    KayleL says:

    I believe that the police would atleast say what he was being arrested for, then this could be been better, and if it doesn’t, then tase him.

  18. 0
    F**ked says:

    And what did the water cannons and dogs accomplish? More rioting? More media coverage? More support for their cause? More violence?

    How did they know he was NOT going to be violent? Well there is something called Context.

    Where was he?
    A College Campus
    .
    Chance that he is college student?
    95%.

    Is the area know for violence?
    Its a college campus at the university of florida, I am assuming no but I will need to double check to see if this college is like living in the Ghetto.

    Is this the type of event that would trigger an act of Violence like a KKK rally?
    No, not likely, it was a senator who was talking to students.

    What did he do?
    Storm the mic and ask loaded questions at Kerry.

    Did he verbally threaten Kerry or any of people there with violence?
    No.

    Was he being disruptive?
    Yes.

    Did he make physical motion that would be consider a threat of violence like raise a fist, take a fighting stance, lunge forward to scare or intimidate, reach into his pockets as if hiding a weapon?
    No, he raised his hands up when the police grabbed him. He avoided the police from grabbing him, kind of similar to the way people ran away from Borat. Jumping and screaming like an idiot, (because we all know that is very threatening)

    When the Person was subdued was their any indication of the Person Conceling a weapon?
    I wouldnt know personally but he was found after the fact with no weapons.

    When the Person was being pinned by 5 Officers did any of the officers get Kicked? Punched?
    I havent heard a single report of any officers being harmed during the rally. So I am assuming no.

    Were 5 officers really need to take down 1 person?
    No.

    Could have this been settle without using the taser?
    yes

    So therefore given the context their was no act of harmful violence that would have been committed.

  19. 0
    F**ked says:

    And what did the water cannons and dogs accomplish? More rioting? More media coverage? More support for their cause? More violence?

    How did they know he was NOT going to be violent? Well there is something called Context.

    Where was he?
    A College Campus
    .
    Chance that he is college student?
    95%.

    Is the area know for violence?
    Its a college campus at the university of florida, I am assuming no but I will need to double check to see if this college is like living in the Ghetto.

    Is this the type of event that would trigger an act of Violence like a KKK rally?
    No, not likely, it was a senator who was talking to students.

    What did he do?
    Storm the mic and ask loaded questions at Kerry.

    Did he verbally threaten Kerry or any of people there with violence?
    No.

    Was he being disruptive?
    Yes.

    Did he make physical motion that would be consider a threat of violence like raise a fist, take a fighting stance, lunge forward to scare or intimidate, reach into his pockets as if hiding a weapon?
    No, he raised his hands up when the police grabbed him. He avoided the police from grabbing him, kind of similar to the way people ran away from Borat. Jumping and screaming like an idiot, (because we all know that is very threatening)

    When the Person was subdued was their any indication of the Person Conceling a weapon?
    I wouldnt know personally but he was found after the fact with no weapons.

    When the Person was being pinned by 5 Officers did any of the officers get Kicked? Punched?
    I havent heard a single report of any officers being harmed during the rally. So I am assuming no.

    Were 5 officers really need to take down 1 person?
    No.

    Could have this been settle without using the taser?
    yes

    So therefore given the context their was no act of harmful violence that would have been committed.

  20. 0
    Grendal says:

    “Yeah he was going to resist aarrest but he was NOT going to be violent. He was going to evade the police and to garner attention. So does that mean we should tase him? NO. So what 5 officers cannot handle 1 person? In this situation they should have just tried to corner him and tackle him. They had 5 police officers and longer he kept up the charde the stupider he would have looked.  Then I guess they should hire masscots that I see at football games. They do a better job of getting people under control than the police officers did here. The police already had him on ground they didnt need to taser him.”

    How exactly were the police supposed to know that? Are all the new police recruits psycichs that instantly know the intentions of an individual who is being beligerent and is as you say resisting arrest. He was refusing to go with them, and was being delibratly obstructionist. I would also like to point out that the standard tactic for civil rights marchers was in no way to resist arrest. When the police came to you sat or lied down and went limp. You didn’t resist but you also didn’t help, thats a pretty big difference from jumping around and screaming like an idiot.

    You also do realise that sheriffs in many southern town during the civil rights movement deployed water cannons and dogs prior to taking people in right?

  21. 0
    Freyar says:

    Here’s the problem. An officer tries to forcefully subdue someone, whether it be a strike from his flashlight, fist, or club he’s considered abusing police authority. He uses a taser, he’s considered abusing police authority.  If the stupid kid (whom later said he was stupid) were to have done what the officers ordered the situation could have been avoided.

    You say that they are lazy because they deployed a taser instead of doing what? Hitting the idiot?

    —-
    There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

  22. 0
    F**ked UP says:

    I believe your history is lacking. There were peaceful protest aka marches that were torn apart by tear gas, barbed wire and so forth. And what did that accomplish? Nation wide attention and support for the civil rights movement. See Selma to Montgomery march for more information. In my opinion, This is like yanking Rosa Parks of the bus, forcing her to fall flat on her face on to the concret sidewalk off the bust by Andre the Giant knowing full well that Andre wouldnt need to use such force to get Rosa Parks off the bus to be arrested

    Yeah he was going to resist aarrest but he was NOT going to be violent. He was going to evade the police and to garner attention. So does that mean we should tase him? NO. So what 5 officers cannot handle 1 person? In this situation they should have just tried to corner him and tackle him. They had 5 police officers and longer he kept up the charde the stupider he would have looked.  Then I guess they should hire masscots that I see at football games. They do a better job of getting people under control than the police officers did here. The police already had him on ground they didnt need to taser him.

    Compare apples to apples hmmm? Lets see a speeding is a crime, so is being a public nuisance. I know that they “arrest” people for being a public nuisance to remove them from the place they are being a nuisance to.  I have actually seen people get tickets for being a public nuisance after they were removed from the area. If they returned to the area within 24 hours they were charged with something greater. So they are apples to apples.

    The Best solution was to have John Kerry take control of the situation and show the type of leader he was supposed to be.

    The Second best solution was for some other person who organized the event or whomever was in charge to take control of the situation and tell him his time was up and allow time for john kerry to answer his questions.

    The Third best solution was for the police to act AFTER his microphone was cut. Let him make the first move then react. They still shouldnt have to taser him but it would appear the police were doing their job instead of over stepping their bounds.

  23. 0
    Mauler ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Don’t make the mistake that Taze-Me was there to get a question answered.  There is nothing that Kerry could have done to satisfy this fool.  He was going to make an incident and did that.  He was going to resist arrest until 1 of 2 things happened.  Either they beat him senseless with batons or they taze him.  The tools in the arsenal of the officer for someone resisting arrest in a non-violent crime are limited at best.

    However, your command of history is lacking if you don’t think that protesters weren’t exposed to “less lethal” methods of crowd control during civil rights and sufferage demonstrations.  Had they tazers available back then they would have used them.  This isn’t about debating a speeding ticket (you are always going to lose that one with the cop who has written the ticket) or for some minor offense that would have ended up with a ticket and a promise to appear but an offense that is going to end up with someone in custody.  Apples to apples and all that.  So which should they have given him – A good beating that leaves bruises or the tazer which has a much shorter negative impact.  Yes, tazers do kill but so does beating someone into submission.

  24. 0
    Anonymous says:

    If it was my friend that got tased for acting like a douche-bag I would feel exactly the same way as I do about this idiot. He got what he deserved.

    Fortunately I don’t have to speculate on this as I have had a friend get tased for acting like a drunk jackass to police and I still mock his dumb ass for it.

    It’s amazing how quickly he listened to the police as soon as there was some repercussions to his actions afterwords.

  25. 0
    F**ked Up says:

    If there is on thing I have learned time and time again is that we are all Human. We are Fallible creatures that make mistakes, bad choices, and etc. Ever heard of the lucifer effect? But if you are going to put urself into a position of power you better hold yourself to higher standard than using the excuse of being human.

    People in Power aka People with more Responsibilities aka the Police aka Politicians all have to hold themselves to a higher standard than being human. If they fail and make a bad choice they should be punished harder than someone who is being human. 

    So of you think it was reasonable to be tasered by the police for getting out of line. So the next time you step out of line can I have the police taser you? If you start to argue with the police office over a speeding ticket should be allowed to taser you? Or how about any act that can be conceived as not following orders or a police officer? How about we taser skaters for skating where it says do not skate? lets taser people for J-walking so that they wont J-walk again. Hell why dont we go taser anyone that is resisting arrest? why or why not?

    I dont know about the rest of you but civil disobedience is usually the way to start a revolution or at least act some change. If taser were allowed back in the during the civil rights movement would it be ok to taser everyone that did not corporate with police especially those peaceful protest, where they would sit limp not fighting with police but not corporating either, not much different that what happen at this rally? How about tasering women during their appeal for suffrage?

    I would like to say that I was disappointed with John Kerry at this rally. If he was a real leader, he would have taken charge of the situation and told the officers how to act and taken control over the situation instead of just stand there and take those load question and have the police for work. He had the chance to show what a great leader he could have been but failed.

  26. 0
    Kincyr says:

    HA! I knew there’d be a game titled “Police Brutality” sooner or later. Too bad Rockstar didn’t develop it.

    岩「…Ace beats Jack」

  27. 0
    JackDon'tKnowJack says:

    I remember reading somewhere that Jackie was pushing his nose up all in the middle of this one. He went as far as to publicly offer his legal advice to the young man and his parents. Like that’s all he needed: first he gets thoroughly Tasered, then he get free legal advice from Jackie. More than any mortal should have to bear. 

  28. 0
    Mike ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Here’s a couple of the problems I am having.

    You keep stating Wikipedia quotes as though they are fact, which they are not.  Here’s the other issue forget the guy who got Tazed at the Kerry lecture.  Does anyone remember or have video of the UCLA Student who was tazed and even said several times that he had a heart condition yet they still did it any way, multiple times. Did he deserve it?

    Your answers would be a lot different if it were your friend, your brother, your family member if it happened to them.  I do feel the police nowadays are to itchy when they come out of the academy. Itching to collar someone, shoot someone, taze someone, etc. 

    In an incident many years ago I almost had a rookie shoot me and all I was doing was walking through the park by my home.  If that doesn’t alert you to the mounting feeling that police aren’t really there to serve and protect I don’t know WHAT else could be more obvious

  29. 0
    Icehawk says:

    Well if jackie were here he would say GTA4 put him up to it.  After seeing the video though I would have to agree that while frantic, the police took the necessary (at least legal) steps to remove Meyer.  Was Meyer out of order? Impossible to say without having been there. 

    Does stike me as odd though that even while Kerry agree to answer Meyers’ questions that the police did not back off a bit.  Still as mentioned earlier, colleges are not easy places to enforce the law, and police for all that they represent authority are still human.

  30. 0
    Steven Schaeffer says:

    Please understand the verbiage in which you are referring. "Excessive force," has a distinct definition in regard to law enforcement and thusly I would advise against casual usage in the lexicon. Police have the right to utilize force when a citizen does not comply with their demands. Similarly, citizens have the right to protest and follow through with legal action at a later date if they believe the orders were in violation of their protected rights as an American. The Taser was utilized, and often is utilized; in order to not only protect the safety of the police officers but the young man as well. Rather than need to inflict the bodily harm of being dragged, bound or wrestled out of the area police used a relatively safe measure in the form of electric shock. That technique is greatly preferable to being hit, struck, pulled, pushed, twisted, doused in chemicals or shot. The police officers in the incident, while frightening for how well they executed their training, acted with a great deal of restraint and level headiness when they proceeded to give the inciter multiple opportunities to cease his actions before they moved to a usually non-lethal form of force. The young man was in violation of the law and was asked to leave, attempts to direct him out failed, and when the decision was made to arrest him he physically resisted officers of the law. And so, with my considerations in mind and while being clear on the scenario, I ask what you would have found to have been a better avenue of action by the involved?

     

  31. 0
    Derek Hale ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    This guy clearly had it coming. They tried to restrain him before they tazed him. He had one cuff on and then he started thrashing around. If a cuff had struck an officer it could have seriously hurt them. Their only other option was to beat the Hell out of the kid and that would have possibly left him with serious damage. They tazed him, turned it off, he was disoriented and was put in the car. He has no serious damage to date, no physical therapy, no scars.

     

    If you want something to fear… Fear the pain ray.

  32. 0
    gs68 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    So, I take it that it shouldn’t be against the law to disrupt someone when he’s speaking. That it shouldn’t be against the law to do a crime as long as it doesn’t directly endanger anyone.  That’s right, it’s okay to steal, vandalize, etc. as long as you don’t hurt anybody.

  33. 0
    Rammsoldat says:

    Youve given a bad link.

     

    I find police these days to be very lazy, i mean theres about 5 of them holding the guy down and yet they still feel the need to taze him? it just smacks of lazyness to me. He deserved to be carted off if not for the way he acted to get such loving attention from the police for the way he acted when confronted by them but from what I see here and there american police are quite eager to use excessive force.

    i dont much care for any kind of police, the way things are these days id be much better off defending myself. Police wont come when you call for help but are always there to tell you what you can’t do.

  34. 0
    Freyar says:

    According to Meyer, he admitted he was out of line, and that the officers did nothing wrong.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniersity_of_Florida_Taser_incident#Legal_action

    While the charges put in place seem a little funny, I do agree that he was out of line, and he should have gone with being escorted out. He was obviously attempting to make a point to the listening people, rather than asking a question that he wanted answers to because he wanted more knowledge. He made up his mind on that fact. To support that, he also brought his own camera, and gave it to someone else because he was expecting a fight. He was fighting the officer to make a story, not because he “was innocent”.

    The officers acted within the law, McGee. That’s the bottom line.

    —-
    There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

  35. 0
    Steven Schaeffer says:

    Creating a rowdy or unruly scene in the vicinity of a high priority official of the state or celebrity in such a manner as to provoke incident or riot is a crime. Unusual behavior in such an area has recognized by the Supreme Court as probable cause to detain, search for weapons and be escort away. Please see Illinois vs. Gates and Terry vs. Ohio for formative cases for probable cause. Furthermore, resisting arrest is a felony and grounds for use of force regardless of the gravity original crime. It is not uncommon to be cleared of any wrongdoing and still be found in fault of a resisting arrest charge.

  36. 0
    Aliasalpha says:

    The guy was a loudmouth but he was being arrested for no legal cause beyond the possible breach of the peace. The tasering was clearly over the line when they had what, 5 cops restraining him? He can’t have been too out of control because the cops never shifted when he was struggling

  37. 0
    Duncan says:

    Before the introduction of tazers, the  police seemed to do a decent enough job of restraining people, without the presumption that every person was packed to the gills with weapons of one description or other.

    This case aside, there are a fair few documented accounts – mainly from Florida, which seems to be The Tazer State – where they have been used needlessly by people clearly not trained for this kind of thing, and in a couple of cases, the Tazee died.

    It’s lazy and DANGEROUS policing.

  38. 0
    Kris O. says:

    @Duncan
    “He may be a prick, but anyone who condones getting treated in that way for shouting a bit needs have a little bit of a think.”

    Shouting a bit? He was running from the police, resisting, and being an obnoxious prick. The police tried to escort him out, but this douche-bag wasn’t going to let that happen. How many times are the police supposed to say “pretty please, with sugar on top?” before they’re allowed to use some amount of force? Should they say it 20 times, and hope that no one gets any violent ideas in their head during that time? Maybe 40 times, while they get on their hands and knees and beg the kid?

    There’s a line between being a dick and being a dangerous dick. When he started being obnoxious, he was a dick. When he started running and resisting, he became a dangerous dick. The police don’t have X-Ray vision. They can’t see that the kid doesn’t have any weapons on him. They’re not mind readers, either. They can’t peer into his head and see that he doesn’t want to hurt anyone. The police don’t want to risk their lives and yours.

  39. 0
    Anonymous says:

    but what about the use of a taser when lethal force isn’t even a passing thought? The use of a taser to replace a fire arm in violent but not life threatening situations is great. The use of a taser as punishment for non compliance is not.

  40. 0
    Anonymous says:

    Not in every case, no. It was more of a general comment towards the anti-taser sentiment. Sure, sometimes tasers can be fatal, but as I said, it’s generally preferable to the alternative.

  41. 0
    Freyar says:

    That’s what I gathered from the writings on wiki and the video itself. He had a question that he already had an answer made up in his head. He acted irrationally prior to the video being started, and he gave his camera to someone else to record him, cutting out all the “before”. He wanted a story, and he decided to make one.

  42. 0
    MaskedPixelante says:

    I’m reminded of that episode of CSI where the guy catches fire after they zap him with the tazer, and then bring in the Mythbusters to find out what happened.

    ~You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

  43. 0
    Overcast says:

    Good to think that way though – at the rate we’re going now, we’ll all end up tazed at some point – for our own good; of course. 

  44. 0
    Duncan says:

    Jesus, I wouldn’t want to know what your low threshold for punishment by electrocution was.

    “He dropped litter! Dude deserved to be tased”

    He may be a prick, but anyone who condones getting treated in that way for shouting a bit needs have a little bit of a think.  

  45. 0
    Trevor McGee ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Then you’d deserve to be jailed, just as I believe those police officers should have been. It is never okay to use excessive force unless your safety is put in danger, and while the kid was annoying he was doing nothing to jeopardize any of the police officer’s health.

  46. 0
    Cheeselikescereal says:

    While I am against police brutality, but I actually support this case. The guy was out of order, and they were trying to escort himm out of the room and he got out of hand. I would have tazed him if I were there.

  47. 0
    Trevor McGee ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    While it’s nice in theory, standing up to the police, even in a non-violent manner it probably would have led to a violent response from the police anyway most likely. It could have happened because one officer feared for his own safety or it could have been sparked by an officer simply irritated by the situation. Who knows? But when a group stands up and suddenly outnumbers the police, they tend to get a little antsy.

  48. 0
    Freyar says:

    I remember watching the video many times in a row, trying to get a good mental picture of what happened. I do agree that authority figures like the police can be intimidating, but at the same time it’s their job.

    I just played the game now, and it’s dead easy. Interesting what the result can be, but there are a lot of other factors that need to be considered than just what this game offers. (Then again, it’s a game, not exactly a simulation.)

    Perhaps they should have collectively stood up to the police in some kind of non-violent, legal way.

    The real problem with this is that interfering with the speaker’s removal would be illegal as what they were doing was a legal order in the first place. He failed to comply, and was warned multiple times (in the video) that he would be hit with a taser if he did not stop his struggling and comply. He didn’t, and as a result he got what he was warned about.

    —-
    There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.

Leave a Reply