UCLA student gets tasered for not having student ID card in the library!

civdef

Apparently the UCPD's (university police department in question) guidelines for the use of force permit Taser use against noncompliant customers (presumably on the basis that it is less likely to result in injuries than traditional use of force methods). Therefore the officers acted in accordance with their department's procedure.

Notably the LAPD and LASD (the two main law enforcement agencies in LA) only use Taser against people who are posing a threat of violence. This is presumably in a desire to avoid situations like the one we're discussing.

In the UK or Ireland, that person would have been physically picked up and dragged / lifted out, and would also have been arrested. They would quite possibly have sustained injuries in the process. Police officers are trained to use pressure points to create pain to get people to move, and / or to administer "distraction strikes".

To me this is more about perception, people somehow seem to see getting zapped but sustaining no lasting effects (other than embarrasment and perhaps very occasional death!) as being wose than getting whacked. Fair enough, but as other incidents have shown, going hands-on gets criticised too - see Mayo last week.

BlitzKrieg

Apparently the UCPD's (university police department in question) guidelines for the use of force permit Taser use against noncompliant customers

Yes but the final section in their policy

officers utilizing any pain compliance technique should consider the totality of the circumstances including, but not limited to:


...(g) If time permits (e.g passive demonstraters ), other reasonable alternatives

Taking in the amount of time between the first shock and the second they did not allow for any time, not to mention the actual crime, there was more then enough time, time only became restrictive when the crowd formed, which as you can see from the video only happened after he was tasered (the number of people that can be seen in proximity to the incident before the tasering at 0:30 seconds is about 3-4, after the taser that grew to an excess of 10.) through their own actions the officers placed a time limit forcing them to use the taser more, making the situation even worse.

To me this is more about perception, people somehow seem to see getting zapped but sustaining no lasting effects (other than embarrasment and perhaps very occasional death!) as being wose than getting whacked.

My argument is that the subject didnt even need to get *whacked* the problem arose (according to the police report) when they attempted to escort him out (which if you take this is the start of the video with the line 'get your hands off me'.) they took the completely wrong approach.

dealing with such cases one should be hands off, unless absolutely necessary and just ensure that the person in question Knows they are to leave and they will remain there until they do. Security and bouncers in pubs and shops across both the UK and Ireland, in my own university take this policy and it works. Grabbing someone to *escort* them out escalated the situation and then they pushed ti further with the tasering.

Officers fault they should have known better.

Manic Moran

UCPD's Taser Policies.

http://www.ucpd.ucla.edu/ucpd/zippdf/2006/Taser_Policies.pdf

though the assailants were much fewer in number and were armed only with nonlethal weapons.

Umm.. yeah. Right.

They are also armed with standard firearms. If they perceived that they are outnumbered and under threat, the Taser gets dropped and the sidearm comes out.


I would not advocate ganging up on cops. It's not conducive to your health, or your long-term record.

NTM

cyrus the virus

You see this is what makes me laugh.

[url=http://newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=7513]UCLA News[/url] wrote:

The safety of our campus community is of paramount importance to me. Routinely checking student identification after 11 p.m. at the campus library, which is open 24 hours

If safety "is of paramount importance", then why is the Library open 24 hrs? Surely if they are concerned about safety, they close the Library at say 9ish and open early at 6ish.

bk

civdef wrote:

In the UK or Ireland, that person would have been physically picked up and dragged / lifted out, and would also have been arrested. They would quite possibly have sustained injuries in the process. Police officers are trained to use pressure points to create pain to get people to move, and / or to administer "distraction strikes".

I'm sorry civdef but the Gardai or most other experienced police officers would not have reacted this way. Seen that a person was unarmed and probably just a hot head student, they would simply have spoken to him. The training for such situations is too calm the situation and not make physical contact which will likely only make it worse.

The first reaction of these officers seems to have been to reach for the tazer, a completely disproportionate reaction to the situation. They then compounded the situation by repeatedly tazering the person who was now already prone on the ground, this is simply inexcusable as they definitely can't argue any self defence grounds. Finally when legally and calmly asked for the badge numbers by other students, they threatened to tazer those students.

I'm sorry civdef, but the actions of these officers are simply inexcusable. What I saw was badly trained and inexperienced officers who made a series of very bad decisions that simply escalated the situation.

BlitzKrieg

its so dodgy having someone with the same initials as me arguing the same point in the same thread.

I have nothing to hide IP check me mods if you want.

bk

BlitzKrieg wrote:

its so dodgy having someone with the same initials as me arguing the same point in the same thread.

I have nothing to hide IP check me mods if you want.

Haha, probably no need for that, looking at our post counts it would be rather schizophrenic for one person to maintain two account like that.

Anyway people actually know who I am over on the IOFFL and BB forums where I post as an ex-committee member of IOFFL.

civdef

he Gardai or most other experienced police officers would not have reacted this way. Seen that a person was unarmed and probably just a hot head student, they would simply have spoken to him. The training for such situations is too calm the situation and not make physical contact which will likely only make it worse.

You may be surpised to learn that not everyone calms down, even if Mother Teresa was dealing with them. Some people lose the head on the least pretext, then only get worse. The way this fella was shouting and roaring, I'd tend to put him in that category.

If as described, the officer aggravated the initial situation by laying hands on yer man when he was already leaving, then fair enough, but it would depend on whether yer man was giving them verbal guff etc.

Like I say , not everyone acts reasonably in these situations, why did the police need to be called at all?

Sand

What a non-issue.

If he simply acted like an adult rather than a 20 something child then the police would never have been called, let alone tazered him. He practically begged for a character forming life lesson, and he received one.

Manic Moran

Worth what you pay for it, but this cropped up on the UCLA message board a few days ago:

"Yes, I was indeed at Powell Library at approximately 11:30 on Tuesday night, and yes I did see the entire event as it went down.

Let me start off by saying that the guy DEFINITELY was asking to get his ass kicked. He was being extremely rude with the campus patrol guys (who are college students...this was before the real UCPD got called in). He was not complying with their requests to leave the premises, and he was definitely itching for a fight. I actually know the guy and a few of his friends, and I can tell you that he's the kind of guy that loves to make trouble.

Just as a little backstory, one of the quotes the guy has on his facebook (which he now has taken down) was "I like to find the most difficult solutions to the simplest of problems".

He definitely taunted the UCPD into behaving the way they did with him."

NYM

monument

cyrus the virus wrote:

If safety "is of paramount importance", then why is the Library open 24 hrs? Surely if they are concerned about safety, they close the Library at say 9ish and open early at 6ish.

Some things in Ireland never change. :rolleyes:

Sparks

civdef wrote:

From what I heard (could see very little on the video) the person in question was acting very aggressively with all the shouting and cursing which would certainly justify some level of force

Good god. You never encountered a trinity librarian so. They figured out years ago that students, while rowdy, are 18-year-old kids. You don't need to beat them up - you need to be able to be able to do a decent Irish Mammy routine (the one where you're being called by your full and entire name, not the one where you get wrapped up in fifteen layers of wool on a june morning).

Tasering? Not cost-effective.

Maybe the UCLA security team needs to be taught a few lessons by an Irish librarian. I mean, in 400 years, we've not yet had to have the ERU called in to deal with a student in a TCD library...

Who here thinks the student acted appropriately?

No, wrong question. The right one is, who here thinks the student was a physical threat to anyone? Because frankly, if bad behaviour is justification to be zapped, the US is going to have an energy crisis because of the amount of power they'll be shoving through prongs and into students...

Sparks

civdef wrote:

In the UK or Ireland, that person would have been physically picked up and dragged / lifted out, and would also have been arrested.

No, they would not have been. The worst that would have happened to them in Ireland would be that the junior dean or his equivalent would have been called in, the student's name would have been taken, and the college would have sanctioned them with a punishment up to and including being expelled.

To me this is more about perception, people somehow seem to see getting zapped but sustaining no lasting effects (other than embarrasment and perhaps very occasional death!) as being wose than getting whacked.

Actually, the big problem I have with it is that no physical violence of any sort was warranted, and no police officer with the smallest amount of cop-on (pardon the pun) or experience would have even raised his voice in that situation. Feck's sake, less than a month ago I watched a 5-foot-nothing lady garda take a 6-foot-wide rugby player out of a club where he'd gotten way too aggressive and she didn't even have to raise her voice once. End result - situation resolved, noone harmed, noone put at risk. And this was a chap who could have done some real damage, not some weedy little 18-year-old student who was just mouthing off (and if you start zapping students in the land of the free and the home of the first amendment because they "mouth off", it's time to close up and turn out the lights on the idea that you're following through on the ideals of the country).

Sparks

Sand wrote:

What a non-issue.

I believe you may need to reexamine your obviously deep and well-considered, nay, erudite analysis of this particular incident in light of what the more colloquial of readers would refer to as "reality".

civdef

Sparks, somehow I think a lack of experience of dealing with properly disturbed individuals is showing here. The police tend to get called to deal with people whose behaviour is well outside what i think you have in mind.

civdef

No, they would not have been. The worst that would have happened to them in Ireland would be that the junior dean or his equivalent would have been called in, the student's name would have been taken, and the college would have sanctioned them with a punishment up to and including being expelled.

What would happen if they became verbally abusive and refused to leave when told to do so by any of the above?

Sparks

Civ, this kid wasn't disturbed.

civdef wrote:

What would happen if they became verbally abusive and refused to leave when told to do so by any of the above?

The same thing as gets done in Irish schools when asperger's syndrome kids get physically violent. You just sit there and wait for them to calm down. If necessary, you discipline them later, officially. Through the system that is set up in every school and college and university to handle such situations, set up specifically so tazering or beating students isn't done. Students are just that - students. Their entire purpose in the academic system is to mouth off. If, when a student opens his or her mouth, you stick a fist in it, then you don't have a university anymore. I'm not sure what you'd have, but I wouldn't send my kids to it, and I wouldn't teach there.

civdef

I hope you never have to face a situation which makes you reevaluate that.

Sparks

civdef wrote:

I hope you never have to face a situation which makes you reevaluate that.

You and me both. The thought of a situation which would make me reevaluate the idea of belting an 18-year-old student in a college library for daring to open his mouth and give me cheek is one that beggars my imagination.

sovtek

Manic Moran wrote:

I'm certainly not going to acquit in my mind the constables of all malfeasance, but neither am I going to blindly accept that a chap who was disobedient enough not to follow requests from college staff and cops managed to not piss off a bunch said cops enough that they saw fit to taser the guy once, let alone five times. For all the distrust that many of us have for people who are given authority, something still must have happened to go through the cop's mind and say "Enough of this, it's time for the Taser"

It's known as a POP offense...as in "Whats that guy in for buddy?" "Oh a little case of POP!" If you've lived long enough in America or been around a cop or two you'll know that acronym.

civdef

Funnily enough POP tends to involve illegal behaviour.

Are people still struggling to comprehend that this fella wasn't zapped for not having his ID card but for his refusal to lawful instructions. Those instructions (in this case to leave the building) aren't optional.

When police tell someone to do something, there's always an "or else". This chap found out about the "or else" bit.

Sparks

When police tell someone to do something, there's always an "or else". This chap found out about the "or else" bit.

No, he found out about the "or else we'll be bullies" bit.
Is there an "or else"? Yes. Usually it gets applied through the courts for people who aren't a physical threat. You walk up to a garda and hurl verbal abuse, drop your trousers and wave your genitals at them, and generally make an eejit of yourself - and you're going to court and being fined and possibly spending time in jail, with all that that entails for your employment prospects, not to mention being humourous gag of the page in the Phoenix in a month or two. You don't get a taser shoved somewhere unpleasant, because we have rules about assault that apply to Garda and civilians alike. Personally, I rather prefer that idea to one of giving anyone carte blanche to use physical violence, thanks.

sovtek

civdef wrote:

Funnily enough POP tends to involve illegal behaviour.

Are people still struggling to comprehend that this fella wasn't zapped for not having his ID card but for his refusal to lawful instructions. Those instructions (in this case to leave the building) aren't optional.

When police tell someone to do something, there's always an "or else". This chap found out about the "or else" bit.

It sounds like he was zapped because he didn't like being manhandled when he was doing what he was asked.
Illegal behavior to most cops I've come in contact with is driving a Camaro with long hair...or "****in hippy didn't do what I told him".
As far as I'm aware, not doing what a cops tells you in itself is not illegal.

civdef

walk up to a garda and hurl verbal abuse, drop your trousers and wave your genitals at them, and generally make an eejit of yourself - and you're going to court and being fined and possibly spending time in jail,

How does one get from the street being abusive to the courtroom? I'm guessing that you've never arrested someone or been arrested, so here's how - in England at least, and the process doesn't vary much here.

For an offence like described above you probably won't get warned to desist, you'll get arrested. This will consist of the police officer physically grabbing hold of you, most likely handcuffing you, placing you into a patrol car or van and taking you to the cells to be booked in, sober up if necessary, possibly interviewed, charged (the verbal abuse will ensure it's probably not just a police caution), then court, probably with bail in the interim. If at any stage in the process you are not compliant, physical force will be used. The level of force will be based on how much is needed to get you to the courtroom.

You should be under no illusions that this wouldn't involve pain to the arrested person, in fact pain compliance techniques are a standard and permitted way to move someone who is passively resisting, usually taking the form of arm locks, wrist holds, handcuff twists, pressure points etc.

The incident being described is a bit different in that it started off as evicting someone from a premises (where reasonable force can also be used - such as holding someones arm on the way out), but turned into abusive behaviour.

sovtek

civdef wrote:

For an offence like described above you probably won't get warned to desist, you'll get arrested. This will consist of the police officer physically grabbing hold of you, most likely handcuffing you, placing you into a patrol car or van and taking you to the cells to be booked in, sober up if necessary, possibly interviewed, charged (the verbal abuse will ensure it's probably not just a police caution), then court, probably with bail in the interim. If at any stage in the process you are not compliant, physical force will be used. The level of force will be based on how much is needed to get you to the courtroom.

No this should consist of the officer asking you to put your hands behind your back first. If you then go limp it should not consist of the officer using pain to persuade you.

The incident being described is a bit different in that it started off as evicting someone from a premises (where reasonable force can also be used - such as holding someones arm on the way out), but turned into abusive behaviour.

Actually it sounds like the guy was leaving on his own (however annoyingly) but the cops were pissed off at this point and weren't quite done with him.
Someone doing what you've told them to do doesn't need your physical input.

civdef

No this should consist of the officer asking you to put your hands behind your back first.

This might be your own opinion, but it's not how things work.

If you then go limp it should not consist of the officer using pain to persuade you.

Again, your opinion isn't in line with police policy, incidentally, using your methods, how exactly would you arrest anyone who just decided to resist passively?

but the cops were pissed off at this point and weren't quite done with him.

It's actually very hard to make the average cop lose their temper, because they've seen it all before. You seem to be attributing motives to their actions without much in the way of evidence.

Sparks

how exactly would you arrest anyone who just decided to resist passively?

Well, tasing them obviously won't work because if you tase them, they can't stand up to walk to whereever you want them to go; which means that by tasing them, you're assisting with their protest...

civdef

Taser effects aren't persistent in the vast majority of cases.

Sand

I believe you may need to reexamine your obviously deep and well-considered, nay, erudite analysis of this particular incident in light of what the more colloquial of readers would refer to as "reality".

Sparks weve got a 5 page thread on some gimp, refusing to comply with reasonable, minor requests, acting like an attention seeking wanker wasting police time, who got what was richly deserved. I repeat, if he had acted like an adult instead of a child the cops would never have even have been called.

Meanwhile in reality, 70 people died yesterday in violent clashes in the refugee camps in Darfur where the situation has to deterioated to the point where women fear rape inside the camps themselves, let alone when they venture out to scavenge.

In light of actual reality, some idiot getting just reward for idiocy is a non issue. Is this Kent State were talking about here?

Sparks

Sand wrote:

Sparks weve got a 5 page thread on some gimp...who got what was richly deserved.

And there we will differ, a state affairs I see absolutely no reason to attempt to remedy.

I would suggest, however, that should you ever want to work as a teacher or lecturer or in any branch of academia, that you review your concept of what students are for.

Is this Kent State were talking about here?

No. It's just the first steps towards it.