HisHoliness
Banned
Stop posting if you're going to blow my posts out of proportion, please. As the reports indicate, he was trying to "start a riot." Violence is certainly not out of the equation, then.
Student Tasering at the University of Florida
- Thread starter All Else Failed
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Stop posting if you're going to blow my posts out of proportion, please. As the reports indicate, he was trying to "start a riot." Violence is certainly not out of the equation, then.
-
146Replies
-
4KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Yeah, because yapping away officially means all of your rights are revoked. Oh I get it, so when my boss starts yapping away at me for taking a break, I should tackle and tazer him? Makes sense....
HisHoliness
Banned
Did you read the incident reports? It sounds as though he was being disruptive long before he got up to the mic. I'm confident that if he had presented the same material and questions in a more respectful way, his question would have been answered, and he could have sat back down.
Im not going to take those reports as being hard evidence. They could have tampered with the content. I dont trust the government in any way, shape or form. Cops are just as crooked as the criminals. They got together, developed a lie and presented it in a police report. Embelishment has been skeeted all over police reports on countless occasions. I could see where they would do it now.
I am surprised at some of the reactions I see from you. This is America, people. The place where Sept 11 occurred. And without getting into the causes for that, the fact is that our country is extremely security conscious. You see it everywhere, the airports, sports stadiums, schools...and yes, especially at political functions. All of us have been asked to "keep an eye out". It might be considered to be a paranoid mentality, but that is the way it is and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
With that as the background, it is no surprise at all to me that this guy was handled in the manner he was. HisHoliness is right. There is a right way and a wrong way for civilized people to approach the question-answer portion of a political event. Generally, there are even "rules" that are sometimes stated to the audience before the speaker even starts. No political candidate should have to fear for his safety. Our government holds the safety of their political figures in high regard. The guy said nothing wrong, at least in the context of his actual words. But his actions, his demeanor, his disregard for authority (when asked to get on with the question), the way he raised his voice when he knew he wasn't being taken seriously...ALL of that combined to send up the red flag in the minds of security. It wasn't one thing he did that got him removed. It was the combination of signs of a potential threat to a political figure; it was the training of security to recognize when an escalation of events may be imminent. This is why we want security: to stop a tragedy before it happens. Was anything going to occur? Who knows? That point is moot. There is no way to only catch the bad guys and to only give a free pass to the good guys. They played it safe. Their actions are justified.
With that as the background, it is no surprise at all to me that this guy was handled in the manner he was. HisHoliness is right. There is a right way and a wrong way for civilized people to approach the question-answer portion of a political event. Generally, there are even "rules" that are sometimes stated to the audience before the speaker even starts. No political candidate should have to fear for his safety. Our government holds the safety of their political figures in high regard. The guy said nothing wrong, at least in the context of his actual words. But his actions, his demeanor, his disregard for authority (when asked to get on with the question), the way he raised his voice when he knew he wasn't being taken seriously...ALL of that combined to send up the red flag in the minds of security. It wasn't one thing he did that got him removed. It was the combination of signs of a potential threat to a political figure; it was the training of security to recognize when an escalation of events may be imminent. This is why we want security: to stop a tragedy before it happens. Was anything going to occur? Who knows? That point is moot. There is no way to only catch the bad guys and to only give a free pass to the good guys. They played it safe. Their actions are justified.
HisHoliness
Banned
The reports are not hard evidence, they're witness evidence. But when multiple officers are saying the same thing, maybe there is some weight to it. But if you're going to discredit anything you might disagree with just because a cop said it, I really can't respond to this post.
But don't you think it's a little extravagant and over the top that these officers would bother to go through all this trouble JUST to silence someone? Someone who probably deep down has similar political feelings as some of the officers? Sounds far fetched.
Boomer, this isn't about people taking a personal vendetta against those who yell at them. This isn't about one person's personal discrepancy with another.
This is a public gathering, with a political figure who is protected by the government, where a crowd is gathered, in a country that is attempting to protect itself from the crazies out there.
This is a public gathering, with a political figure who is protected by the government, where a crowd is gathered, in a country that is attempting to protect itself from the crazies out there.
HisHoliness
Banned
I'm sorry you feel that way. I appreciate how passionate you are for protecting our rights. And there would be times where I'd be right out there with you. But this incident just isn't one of those times. This isn't about our rights. It's about some guy acting like an ass.
I agree for the most part, but for the record his mic was cut when he started ranting about Clinton and "blow jobs"
Wow, look what a simple Google search turned up. The Student Code of Conduct at UF.
The Dean of Students Office
(j) CONDUCT DISRUPTIVE TO THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY.
Conduct that is disruptive to the University�s educational objectives, to its operations, or to its officials, staff, and faculty in the performance of their work, or to any other aspect of its mission. Such conduct includes, but is not limited to:
1. Disruption of a class, University activity, or any other normal activity held on University property or at a University location.
2. Classroom behavior that interferes with either (a) the instructor�s ability to conduct the class or (b) the ability of other students to benefit from the instructional program.
3. Violation of the Campus Demonstration Regulation, Regulation 6C1-2.002.
4. Conduct which is disorderly or a breach of the peace.
(s) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTIVE.
Failure to comply with a directive of law enforcement or a University official.
The Dean of Students Office
(j) CONDUCT DISRUPTIVE TO THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY.
Conduct that is disruptive to the University�s educational objectives, to its operations, or to its officials, staff, and faculty in the performance of their work, or to any other aspect of its mission. Such conduct includes, but is not limited to:
1. Disruption of a class, University activity, or any other normal activity held on University property or at a University location.
2. Classroom behavior that interferes with either (a) the instructor�s ability to conduct the class or (b) the ability of other students to benefit from the instructional program.
3. Violation of the Campus Demonstration Regulation, Regulation 6C1-2.002.
4. Conduct which is disorderly or a breach of the peace.
(s) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTIVE.
Failure to comply with a directive of law enforcement or a University official.
Even with all our rights and benefits as American citizens, even though we live in what is considered the best place in the world for individual liberties, we are still not totally free. There is no place in civilization like that. We have to trust. We have to fear. Security is trained to fear. It's their job. It sometimes saves a life.
WHAT IF the guy was a nut case and pulled out a gun for an assassination attempt and killed innocent bystanders in the process? Then you'd be all over security's butt because they didn't stop him. So how do we know when to stop someone and when to let them have their 15 minutes of fame with a microphone? We can't know. We can only go by the signs that might show a potential problem and act accordingly.
I would expect security to make sure no one is packing. With all the tax dollars spent, no one has a metal detector?
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
the fact remains he ONLY became resistant after the cops used violence against him. blahblahblah end of story.
HisHoliness
Banned
Escorting someone out of the building is not a violent act.
He wasn't trying to start anything, he was asking questions. There's a difference between stating your opinion, even in an 'aggressive way' and starting a riot.
Also, they didn't try to escort him out, they pulled his ass off the stage. They asked him to get off, yes, but that was before he had even finished talking. It's just sad.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
you call that escorting?
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members