DonShock said:
I am always a little suspicious of these police brutality videos that show up on the evening news. They never seem to include any of the lead-in to the incident, just the point at which the police apply force to subdue the subject.
And there's an obvious and clear reason for that: until the altercation gets loud or violent enough to catch the attention of someone with a recording device, they're
not recording it. Granted it tends to leave a question as to what led to the escalation, but the fact the lead-up wasn't recorded is in no way suspicious.
Although I know that police brutality does occur, I believe it is rare.
I suppose that depends on one's definition of "rare." I think only since digital imaging - camera phones and camcorders - became inexpensive and ubiquitous has it been possible to really get a handle on its extent. It's also for this reason that I think the feed of any public surveillance cameras should be made freely available to everyone;
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? As some people say in other circumstances - if the LEOs aren't doing anything wrong, they shouldn't have any objections to being watched.
It's oversimplifying the situation to treat this as tasering being an excesive use of force for a simple lack of ID.
Only because the student was clearly verbally combative, provoking the LEOs on scene. There are, however, two instances where they - in my opinion - quite clearly stepped WAY over the line: tasering a handcuffed person, and threatening onlookers with being tasered simply for their entirely VERBAL objections to the level of force being used and requests for badge numbers.
All too often, what should be a simple LEO request to comply with the rules escalates into an arrestable offence for no reason that I can understand. If you have a complaint, it's fine to take objection and express your opinion calmly. But in the end, even if they are wrong, you need to comply with the LEO on the scene and fight it out in court later if needed. That shows your honoring of the law even if the LEO wasn't.
Here we are in agreement; he should have shown his ID, and if he felt he was being inappropriately profiled, filed a complaint later. Most universities - and I presume UCLA is no exception - take such complaints quite seriously.
However, once the situation escalates it is difficult to fault the LEO for responding to the increased provocation even if he was wrong in the first place.
The problem here is that the "provocation" involves nothing but shouting and going limp. This, to me, does not justify use of force. Let him shout his fool head off since any attempt to muzzle him looks terrible - and then pick his handcuffed carcass up and carry him out. End of story.
There's an old saying about catching more flies with honey than vinegar; this applies to such situations too. I was in Toronto years ago, and had gone out bar-hopping. It was after 2am and I was walking back to the apartment of the friend I was staying with, when a Toronto PD car pulled up; the first words out of the officer's mouth were "Are you all right?" Now, it was clear to me he was looking to determine if I were drunk, or up to no good, but the approach was helpful and concerned. Not being an idiot, I told him I was a tourist, and mentioned the specific building near a specific intersection where I was staying. The fact I wasn't drunk and had a clear destination in mind seemed to answer his concerns, and he bid me be careful - and drove off.
Yes, the student was a jerk - but the officers in question didn't have to meet - and then exceed - his level of obnoxiousness.
