Video: Cops tase moonbat at Kerry speech just to watch him squirm
posted at 9:48 pm on September 17, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Well, not exactly. Via Jay Stephenson, the video shows the cops moving in after just one question although the article Dan Riehl found suggests the guy had been at it for a bit longer than that. I wonder what, if anything, he said or did to alarm them before the clip picks up; they’re awfully quick to grab at him after he finishes speaking and for no discernible reason. From there it plays out like the UCLA incident last year — screaming, struggling, and finally pain-compliance via the taser, which typically is supposed to be used to immobilize a suspect who’s threatening the officer, not to quiet down someone who’s in custody.
As usual with these things, everyone involved comes off badly.
Update: HuffPo’s headline captures the Arianna interpretation of the incident perfectly.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
P.S. He was treated in a manner reminiscent of Genghis Kahn and deserves a Purple Heart.
saint kansas on September 18, 2007 at 9:29 AM
Pseudo-libertarian whiners — the kid got half of what he needed. Do not operate out of control in a public environment, like some sort of ADD 3 year old on a major adrenaline buzz, or you will be brought under control by force.
These days “force” includes a nifty little device called by the product name Tazer. It assures compliance, if not peace and quiet. F*ck this spoiled little leftist brat; I would have gained his compliance with the night stick.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 9:30 AM
Heh. Khan would be passing around a display of the punk’s tongue, nailed to stick, as a demonstration of the kind of behavior that he wishes to discourage.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 9:32 AM
saint kansas on September 18, 2007 at 9:24 AM
What the heck are you babbling about? This situation has nothing to do with the Courts re-writing the Constitution.
If anyone is treating the constitution like a “living document”, you and many of the other posters are, by arguing that because you don’t like the kid he deserved to be grabbed by the police and eventually tasered.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 9:45 AM
The NBC video is enlightening. The guy was shooting off his gob and refused to step away from the mic. His questions were increasingly rude and inappropriate.
Overall, I really enjoyed the video. Was it wrong to laugh?
Malpaso on September 18, 2007 at 9:47 AM
The kid was obviously there to make a scene. He was asked to get to the question and said he’s just getting started, and this is after he’d been filabustering for a while throwing out every kooky talking point he could squeeze in.
Am I to understand that if I have an event anyone can simply march up to a microphone and disrupt the event indefinitely? Nobody can ask them to leave? If they refuse nobody can make them go? Perhaps the parties should start sending folks like this to opposition rallies and ruin them all.
Finally, I hope Hot Air or MM will do a follow up with what rights were broken and if the police did go outside their legal power, what action should have been taken instead.
Dash on September 18, 2007 at 9:55 AM
A poster boy for fascism.
Groovy.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 9:57 AM
Since when is acting like a fool, illegal?? He asked about a secret society, then all of a sudden his mike is turned off and he is “escorted” away.
Please explain to me again exactly what the guy did that was wrong. OK, so he fillibustered Kerry and was a bit over the top with his passion, but AGAIN, what exactly did he do that was illegal?
Scary times to think that one can be tasered for asking a politician uncomfortable questions.
I’ve been to plenty of parties where people were rude and inappropriate. But we didn’t sic the police on ‘em and taser them!!!!
Wake up. This is scary stuff.
The guy didn’t do anything illegal and he was TASERED.
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 9:59 AM
I’m with Dash that the punk needed to be stopped from hijacking the entire forum. But by Taser?
petefrt on September 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
You folks sure stayed up late!
Ah. Well, at least your youth explains some of your vapidity. It doesn’t excuse it, but it explains it.
How old are you? Never mind. Don’t tell me. Cop hatred sent me to bed depressed, and when you tell me you’re still in high school I’ll be equally depressed about public education. Your ignorance on this subject matter is frankly appalling.
For the record, I *am* an attorney. And you are in for a very rude awakening.
Right. You’ve repeatedly stated you dislike the police and then offered anecdotal, singular evidence to explain your thought process.
Hey, I feel you. Last night in my city, there was a home invasion. Three black men shot a woman.
Thus, I hate Black people. All of them.
Right?
Go to bed then go to school. I can’t believe any of us were foolish enough to respond to you.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:02 AM
Think about this. The kid asked questions related to conspiracy theories. He is obviously someone who thinks the government is run by a hidden ruling class, hence the “Skull and Bones” question.
He is only 21-22 and has filled his head with truther moonbat information. He has been convinced the police are nazis. So, he goes up to the mic, in his mind this is his big opportunity to uncover the conspiracy perpetrated on the masses by the Trilateral Commission, the WTO, and George Bush. When he finishes, the fascists haul him away, and no one is doing anything to help him.
In his mind, he is convinced he is being hauled away to a Bush/Cheney concentration camp.
I don’t know whether the taser was required, but as has been pointed out, it appears to be the polices’ quick solution, “I don’t want to have to deal with you, so I’ll taser you into submission, even though polite escorting would have worked.”
What is disturbing is that people apply anger from other events into this one guy. “Then they came for me and no one was left to speak out,” comes through loud and clear to me on this one.
Sensei Ern on September 18, 2007 at 10:04 AM
One more time:
Kerry said he wanted to answer the kid’s question.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 10:04 AM
I am actually really surprised that so many of you are taking the side of the police and saying that this kid somehow deserved to be tasered. This is Step One towards the creation of a police state when you can voice your dissent without being censored by the police.
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
And I guarantee he will be (or already was) deeply confused and disappointed when the police release him and give him a court date in two months.
Not exactly a Stalinist gulag. How disappointing for him.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:07 AM
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 9:59 AM
Your nom de plume perfectly expresses my reaction to the comments from those who think this was an appropriate response.
By the way, Fox is covering this and is going to get comments from the Kerry camp. I will have a modicum of respect from him if he stands by his original request to let the Moonbat speak and doesn’t suddenly decide that the kid deserved it in retrospect.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 10:10 AM
Right.
Rushing to the front of the line in a private function in which the speaker is former presidential candidate and U.S. Senator, still being allowed to ask not one – not two – but three questions – including a harangue about blow jobs – before security tries to initially gently lead you from the room …
… is exactly like living in a police state.
Sigh.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:10 AM
I meant “can’t voice your dissent.”
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 10:11 AM
I’m getting awfully tired of the straw men tossed about in this thread.
Can you please point to the person or persons who stated that the police response was wholly appropriate?
Isn’t the truth that every person in this thread has acknowledge police incompetence? Isn’t the truth that every person in this thread has explicitly or implicitly suggested the police should have (and should have been able to) lead the kid out?
What exactly is your position – since you never make it clear? What exactly do you suggest the police should or should not have done?
To avoid you adding me to the list of people who’s mouths your sticking words in, I believe – actually I know, based on the law – that the police response was perfectly appropriate … although ineffective and incompetent … right up until the tasing.*
The only questions here are whether the tasing was appropriate (and as SilverStar points out – he wasn’t actually tased, anyway) – and why the police were unable to deal with the kid more efficiently.
What exactly is your view?
* Note: nothing in the above is meant to negate the fact that I still really enjoyed watching the kid get tased. It may indeed have been inappropriate. But still priceless entertainment. Sue me.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:16 AM
What?
Blather, I respect your opinion. I really do. And, I understand you are an attorney. I’m just a lowly housewife, so my opinion doesn’t count nearly as much as yours.
But, in my little lowly housewife’s opinion, it doesn’t matter a rats ass if Kerry is a senator or former presidential candidate. Are you saying he was a security threat? It certainly didn’t look like it from my point of view. The kid was asking questions to an elected politician. His mike was cut and he was escorted out and tasered. Yes, he was passionate and acting a bit ADHD, but that’s no excuse to TASER him!! Sheesh.
If that isn’t police state, I’m not sure what is.
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 10:16 AM
If only the DC cops would deal with the White House Press Corps in the same manner, when they taunt President Bush with their never-ending shopping list of gotcha questions.
I’d have to give Helen Thomas a pass on this one. I think a taser would send her to the afterlife. But NBC’s David Gregory and CBS’s Bill Plant deserve a double dose of electrons.
fogw on September 18, 2007 at 10:26 AM
You obviously haven’t read the full account of the incident at Michelle Malkin’s site.
The full truth sort of matters:
As I said to Thacker last night – you need to watch a few episodes of Cops.
If the police ask you to leave an event at which you are causing a disturbance, they are well within their constitutional authority.
If you resist, they have the full right to bodily remove you, using the minimal force necessary.
If you refuse to comply, you just committed a crime.
If you resist physically, as this schmuck did, more force will be used. (And as has been noted a dozen times, the cops obviously screwed up – a couple decent bouncers would have handled this part much better).
If you are restrained and continue to struggle, more force will be applied.
And if you don’t relax and let them cuff you at that point, you’re begging to be tased. Every time.
Am I really the only one who’s ever seen a Cops rerun?
—————-
Oh, and for the record: in a police state, you never would have seen the video. There would be no witnesses. And the kid would disappear. And we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
What exactly do you hysterics think Iran and North Korea and the former Soviet Union are/were really like? Do you have a clue what a “police state” really entails?
Sigh. Of course not.
Do we have a Godwin’s Law violation yet? It’ll be coming soon, I’m sure.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:27 AM
The guy was a Bush basher and a typical leftist loony. All those that didn’t want to listen to his garbage should have left the room and let Kerry deal with him.
rplat on September 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
You’re being knee-jerk reactive to the absolute horrorific image of this poor, poor, person who just wanted to have his say being tased. Everyone of those officers are tased as a part of training. The lasting effects of being tased are nothing. The lasting effects of being thrown to the ground ect have the potential of long lasting injuries.
And saying that people can’t get their day in court and receive justice is absolutely naive. If that was the case, this country would be in a state of total anarchy. Had this poor, poor, poor, victim done as he was asked, he could have gone to court and claimed his rights had been violated. This fool WANTED to escalate this into a confrontation when he could have taken the tack that the code pink wacko’s did last week. Calmly follow the orders that are designed to keep civil order, and leave the premises.
This society is based on rule of law. What is so tough about comprehending that? The rule of law allows the police to remove him. The rule of law allows the kid to redress his grievances in court. The rule of law allows, no REQUIRES that those in authority stay in control of those who would engaged in lawlessness. Had the police allowed this person to do as he pleased, then what stops others who are so inclined to do likewise? NOTHING! You have failed to consider that fact and therefore your claims of fascism are hyperbolic hysteria.
Stopping the person from speaking may have been wrong, but resisting arrest was unlawful and this stupid a$$ escalated this into something it didn’t need to be. Why? Because people with your attitude on this, make it A-OK for kooks to decide what laws they will obey and when.
Your attitude doesn’t care about the audience. You attitude doesn’t care that had this jagoff turned this into something that got others hurt, you’d be screaming that the cops didn’t prevent it.
This a$$hole refused to follow the rules of civilized society and you want to make excuses for him.
Great.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
You’d have to read my whole post — both paragraphs — to understand.
This guy (who I never said should have been tasered–if he actually was–or even cut off for that matter) is literally clinging onto his little conspiracy book. He, the Truthers, etc., all pose as rationalists and skeptics and yet are psychologically predisposed to accept just about any self-published volume handed out on the street corner if it serves their paranoia.
I’d like to know what book he’s holding, since it apparently proves the election in Ohio (in which I voted) was rigged and the machines were counting backward.
saint kansas on September 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 10:16 AM
If you look at the video you’ll see that he actually puts his hands up in the air when he is grabbed by the police. That is a passive, not aggressive reaction, and it’s clear that he was not a threat to anyone.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Yes. Political correctness. And you are reinforcing that mentality by ignoring the fact that rule of law is more important than the stupidity of people who can’t see that and are offended by the “image” it presents. They image it really presents is that of a douche bag who broke the law and got exactly what he deserved. He deserved to be tased and he deserves to be humiliated for his total disdain for the law that keeps our collective society civil.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Does anyone on this thread believe that if the guy had kept his arms at his sides and his voice low, had not repeatedly screamed “somebody help me” (which to a nervous police officer can sound like “let’s start a riot here” and had–even if he had calmly argued that was Kerry WAS asking him to answer)–had said quietly, “All right, all right, I’m leaving,” and immediately and calmly walked out, that he would have been tased?
Speak now or–wait for it–forever hold your piece.
Seriously, though, I don’t think anyone believes that.
My two cents: I have been arrested. Many times, in fact (rescue missions outside abortion clinics years ago). Not ONCE have the police used any kind of force against me or any other prolifer I was with. Even though we were clearly breaking the law.
Why? Because we were silent or very quiet, we sat or lay, and nothing we did could possibly be interpreted as a physical threat, and if we didn’t walk away (we usually didn’t) we didn’t resist as we went limp and were dragged away.
I don’t think this guy needed to be Tasered – he was on the ground subdued already. But he needed to be removed and I don’t know that I wouldn’t have subdued him given his flailing around screaming, hijacking the whole event and possibly (who could know given his behavior?) a physical threat to someone.
inviolet on September 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
What video did *you* watch?
In the video I watched – both of them – the kid squirmed, pulled a hand free, got away, ran to the back of the auditorium, shoved and pushed, wriggled some more, and even after he was grabbed was refusing to obey instructions repeated half a dozen times.
I’ve probably got the director’s cut or something.
——————————–
On the plus side, this thread was making me grumpy. Watching the video again brought back the sunshine. Hep me .. hep me … Bzzzzt. Good times.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:37 AM
Straw man. We don’t like his disregard for the rule of law that the rest of us follow. He is not a benefit to society when he acts like that and needs to be put into compliance with the standards of decent behavior in public.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
First of all, I don’t watch “cops.” I have better things to do, like argue about some kid getting tasered at a Q&A session with Lurch.
Second, I do understand what a true police state is. You don’t need to explain that to me. My point is that when cops step in to censor a citizen’s question (no matter how stupid the question is), you have a problem.
Third, he rushed the mic. Not the senator.
Fourth, they tasered him after he was on the ground, with his hands behind his back.
And for heaven’s sake, I’m not going to compare this to Hitler. So, no need to worry about Godwin’s Law being evoked.
Tasering people for dissent is a slippery slope. That’s the bottom line. Whether you agree with me or not. That’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it.
Now, I have lots to do today – eat bonbons, watch soaps, and the View. So ya’ll have fun with the rest of the arguement. I’m going to enjoy the rest of my day – maybe a nice run by the water to clear my head.
Cheers.
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Too bad for that punk…this was rehearsed and he payed for it.
tomas on September 18, 2007 at 10:40 AM
piecepeace. Shoot, always freaking up the punch line!inviolet on September 18, 2007 at 10:41 AM
That comment just won the thread.
Common sense usually does.
I can’t believe anyone actually disagrees with your post.
That’s actually a very good point. I guarantee that you are right and that at that point, the cops had one primary concern: ending the disturbance quickly before it did escalate.
Which is why they should have just shot him.*
* I kid with you.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Right.
They censored right after they let him run to the front of the line … accost Senator Lurch with questions about conspiracy theories and blow jobs … they let him ask not one – not two – but three full questions …
Right. Obviously that’s police state style censorship.
Of course. You called the United States a “police state” for the above described “three questions, Skull and Bones, cutting in line, blow job” sort of “censorship.”
But you didn’t mean that kind of police state. More of a warm and fuzzy kind. Like Venezuela. Or Alabama.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:46 AM
I am utterly baffled by those of you who say he did nothing illegal. Disorderly conduct, trespassing and failing to obey a lawful order are illegal.
Further, for those that think he shouldn’t have been tazered, how many of you ever escorted someone agitated and irrational out of a room? If the person is not compliant, which this guy clearly wasn’t, there is only one way to do it. You have to over power the person. This creates a significant risk of injury to the subject and those trying to move him.
I’ve never been tazed and I don’t know what the long term effects are or aren’t, but simply muscling him out the door is going to do more than leave a mark, and could easily mean a trip to the emergency room. I’m betting the kid woke up this morning with a court date and little else.
Incidentally, I’ve been arrested more than once and the cops were never violent with me probably because they never had to repeat anything they said.
trubble on September 18, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 10:16 AM
I think my position is very clear. I have repeatedly noted that KERRY SAID HE WANTED TO ANSWER THE KID’S QUESTION.
False.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM
You said that the courts are “unbiased”. I say that that is naive. I never said that he won’t have the courts as an avenue with which to proceed.
I said that jaibones was a fascist, I did not use that epithet to describe anyone but him. If you don’t think he is then you’ll have to explain that. Let me remind you of his comments:
Moreover, in your comments to me you are fixated on the fact the kid was tasered. I have said that I believe this was incorrectly handled well before the tasering occurred.
Please don’t project about “my attitude” and what I would have done in a hypothetical situation that does not in any way reflect what happened here.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
I got the impression that they were just removing him from the room, not arresting him. Since he was disrupting the q and a session, I can see that was warranted.
The tazer was probably unnecessary (though I wouldn’t want the job to decide when it is and when it isn’t), but I still can’t muster up any sympathy for him, not just because of his leftyiness but also because of the arrogant way he acted after being asked repeatedly to stop and how he acted as though he was being taken the gas chambers when it’s possible they only wanted to remove him from the room.
Plus, it’s just a tazer. What damages can he sue for anyway? Being embarrassed on youtube?
Esthier on September 18, 2007 at 10:55 AM
OK. Then please don’t refer to me “arguing that because [I] don’t like the kid he deserved to be grabbed by the police and eventually tasered” when I said no such thing.
saint kansas on September 18, 2007 at 10:56 AM
By the way, the police do have the right to protect themselves from injury. They carry guns. This guy was irrational and escalated the situation. Because he never grabbed at the officers gun, you bleeding hearts think that was never, and should not have been a concern for the officers. A NORMAL (you get that concept? NORMAL?!) person would have calmly walked away when asked. That is the behavior of someone who is probably not a threat. But when you have a out of control kook thrashing about and resisting arrest because he wasn’t allowed to ask a question, you have to look at him and wonder just how bat$hit crazy this guy is.
Tasering him at that point prevented him from serious injuring himself with all his thrashing around. The officers did themselves and him a favor. You bleeding hearts act like he asked a question and was tased before he got it out of his mouth.
NORMAL people follow the rules. NORMAL people obey the law. NORMAL people don’t create an atmosphere of uncertainty around their actions. NORMAL people never escalate minor issues into physical confrontations with the authorities.
Stop justifying the behavior of the bottom feeders of our society. This guy isn’t a freedom fighter. He is a danger to himself and those around him because he cannot behave in civilized society. He engaged in anarchy and lost. Boo freakin hoo!
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:56 AM
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
I think your rule of law argument is a straw man.
The kid was grabbed by the police while asking a question. What law was that he broke again?
Professor Blather,
I watched all the videos too. When the police grab him after his skull & Bones question he puts his hands up in the air and he kept them up.
Well, I’m off to enjoy a lovely swim, and vote in a special election.
I’ll check back later.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 10:58 AM
Your position remains unclear. Once the kid started with the blow job questions and his mic was cut and he refused to peaceable leave – what EXACTLY do you believe should or should not have been done?
No straw men. Speak plainly.
And can you point me to that poster who thinks the police did an all around swell job here? I’m waiting. Or would you like to acknowledge that you invented that straw man, too.
Again – specifics. What exactly was wrong? What would you change?
Or do you not have an answer – you’d just prefer to offer bland and empty criticisms? That’s certainly easier than explaining precisely how it should have been handled.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 11:00 AM
saint kansas on September 18, 2007 at 10:56 AM
I sincerely apologize for misunderstanding your comments.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Blather,
I’ll have to respond later.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 11:02 AM
That is simply a factual lie.
The microphone is cut. The police calmly approach and take him by the elbows. He immediately begins swinging his arms and escapes – violating the law, and clearly appearing threatening to the police.
THEN he puts his arms up … and when grabbed, he continues to resist. Obviously.
At that point, the police STILL try to calmly walk him up the aisle. Another officer assists. He swings one arm free AGAIN and continues to resist.
A large officer then tries to bodily carry him quickly out. He STILL resists, breaks free and runs and almost escapes.
It is ONLY at that point that they take him to the ground.
I invite anyone to actually watch the video. It bears exactly no resemblance to Buy Danish’s version.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Don’t bother. The answer – or lack thereof – is already pretty obvious. Enjoy your swim.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 11:08 AM
And Kerry’s name is back in the headlines. Interesting, huh?
Connie on September 18, 2007 at 11:11 AM
“Self-promoting moonbat rabble-rouser, meet Mr. Taser. Mr. Taser, meet the meat.” Bzzzzzzzzzt!
thejackal on September 18, 2007 at 11:29 AM
For starters, resisting, and then fighting police officers.
And, no, the police didn’t need to tazer you. But it was either that or spank your whiney bottom, which is what your parent should have done to train you not to grow up into such a pansy whiner.
Lawrence on September 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
So, you’re saying he’ll get his day in court but he wont get justice? That’s what I thought you said, thus my response.
Not too many years ago that would have been acceptable, and it still is when the officers do not have access to less violent means of putting an out of control person into compliance with lawful orders. So no, it wasn’t fascist.
Then I apologize but I still think you’re wrong. The kid was given several opportunities to comply. Senator Kerry is not in authority of the security of the event. Had this kid hurt someone because the officers abdicated their responsibility to Senator Kerry, Kerry would have disavowed all responsibility and the officers would have been prosecuted for dereliction of their constitutional duties.
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Yeah, the cops should have never done any of that. As a matter of fact, they shouldn’t have been there at all. It’s not like agitated young male moonbats do anything harmful or are a threat on college campuses. Everybody has the constitional right to do anything they want to anywhere they want to and to anyone they want to according to one of those amendments or something.
He didn’t do anything illegal. The cops should have stood outside and waited until he did something illegal like harming or killing someone (or someone else harming or killing him) before they rushed in with nonlethal pointblank-range-only weapons and harsh language.
angryoldfatman on September 18, 2007 at 11:35 AM
OK, one more time….
About says it all, just not as colorful as this….
Bwahahahahahaa!!!
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 11:39 AM
I detect sarcasm.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 11:40 AM
One of the many services I offer – battery tester for sarcasm detectors. Yours is in fine working order, good sir! ;-)
angryoldfatman on September 18, 2007 at 11:42 AM
So, after pandering to the extreme left for so long, the Democrat’s Big Tent has now turned into Jurassic Park.
“
LifeMoonbattery finds a way.”BohicaTwentyTwo on September 18, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Thank you for analogy as to what happened, because I saw the same thing. In fact, I’ve seen brats in stores squirm out of their parents hands the exact same way this kid did.
It’s too bad that some people have forgotten that we are a land of laws. You do not have a “consitutional right” to do anything you want. For those that think you do have that right to do anything you want, don’t call the police when you need help. You’ll be a hypocrit and you’ll be infringing on the other person’s “consitutional right” to do anything they want.
moonsbreath on September 18, 2007 at 11:47 AM
i was just thinking…
would it be so bad if the alex jones, john bircher nuts were allowed to flourish?
wouldn’t it be better to have them working their crazy magic over the next 4-8 years of hilliary?
as for this incident, i say we amplify the point that of course kerry ordered the tasing himself and that this is an extension of the police state which progressives, who hate free speech, want to impose on us all.
is this not how “mainstream” progressives have used their nuts these past eight years and further back? and who would you say is winning public sentiment?
jummy on September 18, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Honestly, parents need to bring back the “board of education.”
I’m sick to death of the stupid college kids in all these videos.
Esthier on September 18, 2007 at 11:57 AM
I went over to neoconnews.com and read the write up about what happened. Watching the video posted here doesn’t put the episode in context.
Here’s what neoconnews.com had to say:
Although I think the police were too rough on the guy, this write up gives a play by play blow and puts this into context, so I’ve changed my view a bit.
I’m allowed to do that, right?? :) My run by the water cleared my head. So, I’m sorry if I called the U.S. a police state. (although I still see might rights eroding slowly away, that’s a different conversation for a different time.)
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Another reason why I hate cops. Those bastards think they can do whatever they want. Talk about power hungry.
You don’t taser someone because they are being loud. You don’t taser someone because you don’t agree with them.
The only time you taser someone is when you are being threatened…not to get them to what you want them to do.
What a bunch of BS.
msipes on September 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
my rights
I can’t type today.
pullingmyhairout on September 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
DSM-IV Diagnoses and Codes
Alphabetical
301.83 Borderline Personality Disorder
780.59 Breathing-Related Sleep Disorder
298.8 Brief Psychotic Disorder
307.51 Bulimia Nervosa
666.00 Bush Derangement Disorder
305.9 Caffeine Intoxication
Connie on September 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Anyone who ends their sentences with “bro” should get zapped.
A spoiled brat know-it-all kid got what was coming to him. When the police tell you to do something, do it.
He should try and act that way with the police in Europe. Oh, the things I’ve seen…
watchmen on September 18, 2007 at 12:17 PM
This awesome thread could use some comments:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/09/18/hot-air-tv-vigil-at-walter-reed/
And nobody gets tased.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Wow. The lengths democrats go to avoid answering a tough question. I’d sue the hell outta that college; moonbats are annoying but this one didn’t break the law.
Zach on September 18, 2007 at 12:29 PM
How long were the security personnel suposed to chase this guy around the room?
awake on September 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Hey ALLAHP …. isn’t there some kind of age requirement to register here for comments… like, older than 15?
SilverStar830 on September 18, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Another way of looking at this is through the lens of history. In Edwardian England, the notion of carrying anything to identify yourself was unheard of. This is not because they didn’t have IDs (which they didn’t), but because, in that society, a lady or gentleman, when asked who they were, would answer honestly. The only individual who would falsify their identity was someone nicked by the constabulary and facing charges that would prove counterproductive to their social standing (e.g., Bertie Wooster falsely ID-ing himself when arrested for pinching a policeman’s helmet on Boat Race Night).
Fast-forward to the present…
ID theft is rampant and currencies are eagerly counterfeited. People crash planes into buildings in hopes of getting 72 virgins and 28 young boys. Celebrities are taken seriously. Dogs and cats living together…you get my drift.
So when this a$$clown charges the stage demanding answers to questions intended solely to embarrass a federal politician, just what do you expect the police or security personnel to do?
A. 110 volts
B. 220 volts
C. DeWalt 4×24 variable speed belt sander
I have no problem with dissent, disagreement or the temerity to task our elected officials with pointed questions. I most certainly have a problem with a society that permits uncivil lowlifes to spoil the fun for the rest of us. And if electricity is the tool of choice, then be happy there are no carbon credits involved.
End of lecture.
thejackal on September 18, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Kind of surreal with Kerry mumbling in the background.
Drtuddle on September 18, 2007 at 1:13 PM
I want this:
“Don’t taze me bro! OW! OW! OW!!!!”
as my new ring tone.
Loundry on September 18, 2007 at 1:26 PM
This kid got just what he asked for. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to act disorderly as he did. Refusing repeated requests from the officers got him what he deserved. A taser beats a night stick.
Pesonal message to the bonehead. Thanks for the laugh. I haven’t heard screaming like that since my brother gave me a wedgie when I was 12.
Hammerhead on September 18, 2007 at 1:26 PM
I want this:
“Don’t taze me bro! OW! OW! OW!!!!”
as my new ring tone.
Loundry on September 18, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Thanks a lot. I just spilled coffee all over myself.
thejackal on September 18, 2007 at 1:32 PM
i may be able to manage that for you.
jummy on September 18, 2007 at 1:35 PM
He deserved the tasing just for being a drama queen.
infidel4life on September 18, 2007 at 1:45 PM
And the cops would’ve been disciplined and sued for not following internal policy. What are they to do under the circumstances?
Damned if you do…well, you should know how this ends.
Miss_Anthrope on September 18, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Me too! Me too! :D
Miss_Anthrope on September 18, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Professor Blather,
The videos that I saw were the ones that Hot Air posted and the NBC video.
The Neocon News dissection of the video provides a lot more information than the other two which begin when he is already at the mic.
The time to have hustled the kid out should probably have been when he rushed the mic at the very beginning because that move alone was disorderly.
I found it very odd that they let him go on and suddenly jumped in when he mentioned Skull & Bones. From those 2 videos it’s impossible to understand what he had done at that particular moment that warranted the police action (and I still don’t quite get the timing of this) particularly since Kerry is heard saying, “That’s alright, let me answer his question”. So, my objections to what the police did were that they grabbed him for what appeared to be merely asking loony questions.
My objection the comments here have been to those that essentially argued that because he was a Moonbat he deserved what he got. That is not a “straw man” argument as there were people who made comments of that nature.
There is a certain irony here that a Moonbat is being arrested for carrying on at a John Kerry event.
csdeven,
I was merely pointing out that your general insistence that the courts are unbiased is naive. I did not mean to imply that the kid can’t get a fair hearing.
As for Jaibones comments, he implied that he should be hit with a night stick because he was a “leftist brat”, and that is where I think we have to be very careful.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Buy Danish, if you think that the police using force to bring a screaming brat under control in a public setting with a sitting U.S. Senator present is “fascist“, then you might want to do some reading. Douchebag.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Other famous internet douchebags that like to whine about “fascists” include most of the HuffPo ninnies and the great Justin Raimundo of DKos.
You’re in great company.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 2:50 PM
What Happened From John Kerry’s Perspective
Posted by the Online Communications Director for John Kerry
There are a couple of other diaries over there. Read one. Didn’t have time for the other.
Connie on September 18, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!
omnipotent on September 18, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Who are you and what did you do with Loundry?
More to the point, who did you steal that sense of humor from?
Let me know if you find the ring tone. Although I’d prefer the “help, help, I’m being oppressed!” part of the action.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 2:49 PM
It’s not the fact that he was a screaming brat, it was that he was a Leftist screaming brat.
I do hope you can see the difference.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 3:22 PM
Sorry I missed your posts. I was over in that other shocking thread. (Get it? Shocking? I’ll be in town all week. Tip your waitress.)
Yeah. They obviously needed more basic security to maintain a little order. Ironically, they probably do when its a conservative speaker. They probably weren’t expecting trouble.
From my viewings it seemed pretty simple – the cops waited to approach him until the microphone was cut off. You see the guy in the jacket signaling to cut it off not long after the blow job comments start. The second the mic goes dead, the cops step forward and take his elbows.
At which point, most people would have quietly walked out, no trip to the jail, no ticket, nada.
Instead, Sparky Moonbat got excited. With predictable results. (Go watch those similar videos I posted in the other thread for a sample of just how common and predictable those results were).
If you fight cops, you get tased. Once he started wiggling, the game was over.
The only two debatable questions I see are: should they have approached him at all? (I don’t really see the alternative, other than let him rant until he got tired ..) and should they have tased him on the ground?
The last is the only interesting question. Although again, if you go look at those YouTube videos I linked, you’ll see its awfully common. If you’re on the ground, let the cops cuff you. Don’t resist. If you do, odds are you’re getting tased.
I think you’re sort of misinterpreting some of our comments on that one. Personally (I personally believe, such as), I’ve been making two lines of comments: one semi-seriously discussing the legalities and proprieties of what happened … and the other just enjoying a little schadenfreude.
They aren’t necessarily related. Even if I totally agreed that the kid shouldn’t have been tased … I’d still say he deserved it. Sort of tongue-in-cheek. Get it?
For example: I don’t think anybody should dump a bucket of pig manure on Rosie O’Donnell’s. But boy she deserves it, and I’d giggle.
A lot.
But I’m not justifying the latter with the former or vice versa.
Professor Blather on September 18, 2007 at 3:30 PM
If anything it was the blowjob question before that. In order for the cops’ reflexes to be so fast at the mention of Skull & Bones they would have to be trained to response to that particular phrase.
pedestrian on September 18, 2007 at 3:41 PM
jaibones,
Okay, I went to your links.
I have no idea what the significance of the first one is since I have not seen “A Princess Bride” and have no intention of doing so.
Secondly, fascism as used in popular culture refers to an authoritarian regime, or authoritarian tactics. I generally use the term to describe Leftists like at MoveOn who wield a big club, metaphorically speaking. Because of the way you worded your comments it seemed apropos to use the epithet to describe you.
Your argument that “a sitting Senator was present” is worthless since that same sitting Senator encouraged the kid to keep on talking.
Neither Kerry (nor I for that matter) knew until today what had happened before he rushed the mic, so viewing it from that perspective what the police were doing appeared to be excessive and unnecessary.
For the record, I do not believe at all that people should be able to disrupt events like these and interrupt and shout down speakers. However, the video that Hot Air posted did not indicate that that was what was happening. Indeed it appeared that he was being silenced for expressing bizarro views with a bit too much gusto.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Exactly. It’s funny how things have moved so far to the Left that John Kerry might now be considered kinda right wing if you’re a Truther.
I also understand the schadenfreude completely, and I never thought that you were one of the ones who were saying he’s a Leftist punk so let him have it…and seriously meant it. I’d have to go through the thread again (which I don’t want to do because life is too short) but there were some comments that could easily be construed that way which did not have the necessary humor to balance them.
pedestrian on September 18, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Okay fine. I am not implying that there is any significance to his using the phrase “Skull & Bones” (except facetiously very early on with my first comment). I merely used it as a reference point to when the police stepped in.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 4:02 PM
WOOPS!
The 4:02 was not a response to Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 2:49 PM
It was meant for Professor Blather!
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 4:04 PM
I don’t understand your point. What’s “not the fact”? You think I am a fascist, or the cops are fascists because the kid was a leftist? Please clarify.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Are you suggesting that how a word or expression is employed commonly is somehow related to how it is used correctly?!
1. “Popular culture” is the church of moonbats.
2. How many people know how to employ “via” correctly?
3. Only Jeff Lebowski is allowed to use “fascist” incorrectly.
What we all saw in those videos had NOTHING to do with fascism. I lived in Saudi Arabia for 4 years. Don’t pretend to lecture me about fascism. In a fascist country, there would be no video, no explanation and no obituary.
What we all saw was a pissy-pants Cocao-Puff getting spanked for being unruly. And since when does a tasing victim get up and walk away coherently in 15 seconds?!
thejackal on September 18, 2007 at 5:22 PM
Buy Danish, all right, fine:
Sorry…wrong. You can’t just make up hyperbolic meanings for words to suit your mood. Fascism has a definition, and my endorsement of the use of a specific police tool — the nightstick — for its intended purpose — the rapid adjustment of an unruly person’s attitude in an effort to control their behavior — does not fit the definition.
That’s part one.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:26 PM
Buy Danish, part two.
I don’t know what was informing your quick condemnation of the police, but no, I did not perceive that the police gave a good hot damn what this jerk’s opinions were, of if they were actually listening to a word he said. What I saw in the tape was three cops already standing next to him and urging him to stfu before he even got to the stupid parts, and I perceived that he was on a very short leash.
This was reinforced by their subsequent actions.
I know cops, and very few of them seem to care about political opinions, but they do care quite a bit about people acting crazy in the environments that the cops are policing. And they had this punk pegged right from the gitgo. They were fully vindicated by his increasingly insane behavior, imo.
As for the “sitting Senator”, you must be joking. Really. Does anyone else out there believe that the active duty security personnel in a public event might not be influenced by the presence of a U.S. Senator 40 feet away from a highly agitated individual? Buy Danish, have you ever actually met a cop?
Conservative, liberal, libertarian — irrelevant. When the cops tell you to shut up and follow them, that’s what you do. When you don’t, you intentionally set in motion the rapid escalation of a series of physical reactions, and none of them are fun. Every word out of the mouth of this nitwit reinforced the actions the cops were taking, in their minds. Of that I am certain.
And it had nothing to do with fascism, nor with politics.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:37 PM
Right.
PS BD, the Princess Bride link was an audio link; try it with volume. I tend to default to Princess Bride lines at every opportunity.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:41 PM
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Part one.
You used the fact that he was a Quote Leftist Unquote brat as part of your suggestion that in the good old days they would have used a nightstick.
We cannot wield nightsticks because of people’s political views, unless of course you are a fascist Country or an independent agent of fascism.
As for the Princess Bride link, I realize it was an audio link. It meant nothing to me, which led me to think that I’d have to be familiar with the movie for it to make sense.
I am not making up a definition. Words have many meanings and fascism is one of those words. Here is an example of how it is used in popular culture. Liberal Fascism: The Totalitarian Temptation from Hegel to Whole Foods by Jonah Goldberg.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 5:37 PM
Part 2
I was looking at the Hot Air video as originally posted and my comments have to be put in perspective to what that video showed, not what subsequent videos have shown.
In any case, I was not arguing that the police were “Fascists” and I never said that they went after him for his political views. I suggested that you were “a poster boy for fascism” because of your Leftist brat comment.
I never argued about the tasering of the kid – my point all along went to the question of why he was grabbed in the first place.
Buy Danish on September 18, 2007 at 7:06 PM
I’m surprised by the tone of the comments. If we value free speech in public forums then a good test is forget about political affiliation or what kind of bafoon the guy is and try watching that video with the sound turned off.
I see a public event with someone at a microphone that was clearly placed for use by the public. The speaker does nothing other then talk. Police beging to use force to remove him when he will not stop speaking. Despite overwhelming manpower, the police then choose to physically subdue and demand he stop speaking rather then simply remove him.
If those in control of the venue didn’t like what he was saying, they can shut off his mic or not place an uncontrolled mic directly in the crowd. This is not a situation where he charged the stage and took over a mic or was some kind of security threat! Why would free speech on an open, uncontrolled, mic be met with physical force? This is absurd! Take some scisors and cut the mic cord before you resort to violence!
Now maybe there can be some argument about he was resisting arrest, but this is a tanget that doesnt awnser why is he being removed by force after doing nothing more then speaking at an open mic placed there for the public.
I understand police need to use physical force. Go ahead and use deadly force against suspects who are violent, I have no problem. When police use violence against non-violent offenses, the rule of law is breaking down. It seems to be becoming routine that being arrested means you are treated violently even if your offense is nonviolent in nature.
Resolute on September 18, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »