UCLA Incident: Was the Police Response Appropriate?

[Quaoar]

I saw that folks were guessing what percentage of people support the police in the UCLA tasing incident. So I figure, why don't we find out the actual numbers?

 

[Evo]

First, I'd have to know what their procedures are before I could say if they followed procedure and acted appropriately.

If you're asking if I think the officers used excess force, no.

 

[dontdisturbmycircles]

I said not enough evidence as the videos often don't clearly show the guy or what's happening to him, and the "he's handcuffed" picture in the other thread is waaay too blurry to make a conclusion. I enlarged it with photoshop and played around with the colours hoping to get a better picture of it but to no avail. I would say that he deserved what he got, but perhaps with a better video my oppinion would be more concrete.

 

[brewnog]

Videos don't show enough evidence.

 

[SpaceTiger]

Certainly not enough evidence, especially in the beginning of the confrontation. If the student's initial behavior was extremely inappropriate, I'd be more sympathetic to the officers. Likewise, if the student really was being passive prior to the use of force, I'd say they were out of line. Clearly, both parties were angry during the encounter, the question is which one was more justified.

 

[Astronuc]

I can't tell what happened, since the video seems to have started after the altercation, so the precipitating event is not evident. All we have is hearsay, being removed from direct observation.

It would appear that the police did not handle it well. The authorities, university and legal, will have to determine whether or not the campus security handled it correctly.

I think the student handled it poorly if he tried to challenge the campus security when asked to leave. Evo is correct (in the other thread) - all the young man had to do was leave quietly and immediately when challenged. He should be familiar with the security policy at the university. As it is oft said, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Very sad all around.

 

[RVBuckeye]

They should have maced him as well.

 

[Quaoar]

To me, it just sounded like the guy was being a total drama queen. He probably has faced a ton of discrimination as a Muslim in the past couple of years, and this incident was the tipping point for him.

That being said, there's no reason to stun the guy if all he's doing is being loud and obnoxious, and if you have him outnumbered. If I was in a situation where several people were ganging up on me, you better believe I'd try to get help from anyone in the area by being as loud and obnoxious as possible.

I do not care how nasty the guy was being to the cops, you just slap him in handcuffs and put him in the back of your squad car until he calms down. There's no reason to go to the next level.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Not enough evidence for me. I do think they could've done it way better, but unless I know their standards I can't speculate on whether it was appropriate or not.

 

[Astronuc]

. . . . being loud and obnoxious . . . .

In a library?

Isn't that a capital offense!?

 

[Hurkyl]

I do not care how nasty the guy was being to the cops, you just slap him in handcuffs and put him in the back of your squad car until he calms down. There's no reason to go to the next level.

That is the next level.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Apparently even Taser International warns against using the Drive Stun multiple times.

 

[russ_watters]

Good thing that isn't what they used...

 

[Cyrus]

I voted over reacted.

Because the guy does not comply does not mean you can automatically start stun guning him. There were plenty of cops around to pick him up by the arms and legs and throw him in the back of the squad car. (He was in handcuffs) They could have cuffed his hands and legs if necessary.

Saying, "get up or i'll stun you" is no better than saying "get up or ill shoot you."

It does not work like that.

Let's face it, that was use of force by the police because he was not complying. But, he was clearly NOT a threat to the police to warrant that kind of force despite his noncompliance.

Although, I would tazer him for being a dumbass. Ba-ha-ha-ha..but then again, I'm not an officer of the law.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Good thing that isn't what they used...

http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960
The officers used the "drive stun" setting in the Taser, which delivers a shock to a specific part of the body with the front of the Taser, Young said.

 

[Hurkyl]

Saying, "get up or i'll stun you" is no better than saying "get up or ill shoot you."

How so? The former is a threat of temporary discomfort, and the latter is a threat of serious bodily injury.

There were plenty of cops around to pick him up by the arms and legs and throw him in the back of the squad car. (He was in handcuffs)

And you think this is less force than a stun?

 

[Cyrus]

How so? The former is a threat of temporary discomfort, and the latter is a threat of serious bodily injury.

I don't care which is worse, they are both going over the line in this situation.

And you think this is less force than a stun?

Yes, I do. Picking him up and throwing him in the car is obviously less force. There were more than enough cops to restrain him and carry him away.

The first time he got stunned, he had it comming when he was fighting the cops in the handcuffs. But afterwards, the cops were just being as$holes and making threats with the consequency of force.

Get 5 of those cops standing around to grab his head, arms, legs, and body and carry him out to the cop car. Is that so hard?...

 

[Hurkyl]

I don't care which is worse, they are both going over the line in this situation.

Why?

Yes, I do. Picking him up and throwing him in the car is obviously less force.

If that was so obvious, then why would I ask?

But afterwards, the cops were just being [edited for content] and making threats with the consequency of force.

Stop violating the language guidelines, or you'll get tazed. :tongue2: But seriously, force was required here, so you can't condemn anyone merely because force was used.

Get 5 of those cops standing around to grab his head, arms, legs, and body and carry him out to the cop car. Is that so hard?...

And there's no risk of hurting or injuring the guy? (Or the guy hurting the cop?)

 

[Cyrus]

And there's no risk of hurting or injuring the guy? (Or the guy hurting the cop?)

How is a guy getting carried away by 5 cops by the arms,legs and head, IN HANDCUFFS going to be a huge risk?

Stop violating the language guidelines, or you'll get tazed.

Stop it, that tickles.

If that was so obvious, then why would I ask?

I donno, you asked. :tongue: Seems obvious to me, at least...

Holding a guy down and saying stand up or I am going to stun you, is sadistic and naive.

 

[Hurkyl]

Holding a guy down and saying stand up or I am going to stun you, is sadistic and naive.

Huh? What does that have to do with this scenario? Nobody was being held down.

 

[russ_watters]

http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960
The officers used the "drive stun" setting in the Taser, which delivers a shock to a specific part of the body with the front of the Taser, Young said.

My mistake - I didn't know a taser could be used without the barbs. But your article says that Taser warns against using it in that mode because of effectiveness, not because of physical harm:

Even the company that makes the stun gun, Taser International, urges caution about use of the weapon in the "drive-stun" mode and with repeated shocks — uses that The Post survey found have been frequent on the streets of Palm Beach County and the Treasure Coast.

When the two barbed prongs that Tasers shoot are ensnared in skin or clothing, they transmit 50,000 volts of current that override the nervous system and temporarily paralyze muscles. The greater the distance between the prongs, the more incapacitating the effect. Another five-second jolt can be administered by pulling the trigger again as long as the suspect hasn't ripped out one of the prongs.

Officers also can remove the prong cartridge and discharge the weapon directly against a person's body in the "drive-stun" mode to subdue combative arrestees with a searing jolt of pain.

The Taser training manual advises that because it is not incapacitating, this mode can lead to "prolonged struggles" and that "it is in these types of scenarios that officers are often facing accusations of excessive force."

The technique also requires some care, according to Taser International, but the company's guidelines contain conflicting recommendations. The manual points out that the neck and groin "have proven highly sensitive to injury, such as crushing to the trachea or testicles if applied forcefully." The manual continues, "However, these areas have proven highly effective targets."

A recent amendment to the DeLand Police Department's Taser policy is clearer, saying that the "drive-stun" mode can be used only under exceptional circumstances. Local policies don't address the use of the "drive-stun" mode in writing, although narratives in some of the reports examined by The Post acknowledge that this use is discouraged.

Basically, it says "drive stun" hurts but is less effective at incapacitating, so the resistance of the criminal sometimes goes up, which leads to brutality accusations.

It does not say that use of that setting in-and-of itself is dangerous (except when applied to particularly sensitive areas).

 

[russ_watters]

How is a guy getting carried away by 5 cops by the arms,legs and head, IN HANDCUFFS going to be a huge risk?

You don't see the risk in trying to restrain someone's legs? Seriously?

 

[Cyrus]

You don't see the risk in trying to restrain someone's legs? Seriously?

I've seen them do it on "Cops." They hand cuffed the guys hands and legs, picked him up by the arms and legs, and put him in the back of the police car. The guy couldn't move. I was like damn, they went all out on his butt.

 

[DaveC426913]

I've seen them do it on "Cops." They hand cuffed the guys hands and legs, picked him up by the arms and legs, and put him in the back of the police car. The guy couldn't move. I was like damn, they went all out on his butt.

How would they get him down those flights of stairs?


I still don't get all this "overreaction" thing. Would telling the guy to "get up" and do his own walking ... I don't know ... another five hundred times be enough for you before you grant that the police decide he's not cooperating?

 

[Cyrus]

That's not what I'm saying at all Dave.

I'm saying its stupid to think that yelling at a guy who is noncooperating to "get up or I'll stun you again" is going to get you anywhere.

I said they should have carried him out of the place, not sat there and zapped him a half dozzen times.

As for the stairs, I donno, use the elevator if there is one, or carry him down the stairs. There were a half dozzen cops around. More than enough to restrain him and carry him away. Watch the video, most of the cops were just standing around.

 

[0rthodontist]

(if you have not been reading the other thread)
From the Las Vegas metropolitan police department:
http://www.aele.org/taser-lvmpd.pdf

The TASER® may be used when a subject is displaying active, aggressive or aggravated aggressive resistance to an officer
attempting to conduct legal law enforcement activities (see 6/002.00, Use of Force, for definitions).

The TASER® will not be used:
1. when the officer knows a subject has come in contact with flammable liquids or is in a flammable atmosphere;
2. when the subject is in a position where a fall may cause substantial injury or death;
3. punitively for purposes of coercion, or in an unjustified manner;
4. when a prisoner is handcuffed;
5. to escort or jab individuals;
6. to awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals; or
7. when the subject is visibly pregnant, unless deadly force is the only other option.

(italics and underlining in the original document; bold added by me)

By the way cyrus--that is a good point, I'm pretty sure that a library at a public university must be handicap accessible. There would have been an elevator or a ramp.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Basically, it says "drive stun" hurts but is less effective at incapacitating, so the resistance of the criminal sometimes goes up, which leads to brutality accusations.

It does not say that use of that setting in-and-of itself is dangerous (except when applied to particularly sensitive areas).

Right, which is why I think they were using it wrong. They were trying to stop him resisting but all they did was make it worse. Which is the wrong decision. Of course, using the drive stun like that could be "acceptable" but whether they could've done it a better way or not is a different thing.

 

[Cyrus]

6. to awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals; or

:rofl: Hey, wake up stupid! BZZZZZZ

 

[dontdisturbmycircles]

lol