Skip to content

UCLA Student Taser Incident

November 19, 2006
by

 The Florida Taser incident can be found here.

Last Tuesday, November 14, 2006 a UCLA Student was tasered countless times.  I would go back and count, but honestly I can’t listen to his pain anymore than the one time that I have watched it allready.  You be the judge:

p>

Sorry I haven’t been posting or commenting I have a few projects going on, hope to visit everyone shortly!

30 Comments leave one →
  1. dawood permalink
    November 19, 2006 9:05 pm

    Apparently he is the brother of a friend of an online friend of mine. I watched the clip but can’t understand why they would have to use a taser gun on a student, even if he wasn’t leaving the library anyway. Let alone multiple times!

    Was it simply because he didn’t have his ID card or what? Jeesh, that happens all the time in most student libraries I have ever been in, yet nothing like this happens.

    I hope they get taken to court and dealt with properly – if it was for no real reason (none I could see anyway), then they misused their power and it is a huge issue.

  2. November 22, 2006 12:42 am

    I really have no idea. Someone is doing a much better job of covering this on http://www.eteraz.org

    Although she says that her brother a student at UCLA says that the student “does not look muslim” I had to come back to look, because I remembered that before they took him out of the upstairs part of the library there were scenes where you could see him somewhat.

    Looking at the footage, I would say that he has darker skin tone, but the fact that he yelled out patriot act during the beginning of the footage would have tipped the police off. I read somewhere else that they arrested him in order to confirm his identity ?

    As to why they would repeatedly tazer him, I have no clue. Whether it was an issue of racism – I don’t know.

    Definately police brutality. I’d really like to know what the police were thinking with all those kids and their video phones.

  3. Ghengis permalink
    November 27, 2006 6:22 am

    Police brutality my ass. Stand up when they tell you too. Leave when instructed. Shut your damn mouth and do what you are told. I hope they tasered him again outside for good measure. Bunch of whiners from the “entitlement generation” getting your panties in a knot.

  4. richard permalink
    November 29, 2006 12:17 pm

    seriously people, bringing in the fact that the guy is muslim won’t fit in this situation at all. they would have tazered anybody whether their skin was blue or green or whatever. yeah, i’m totally pro on this situation considering that he didn’t stand up at all especially being asked a BILLION times… but, it was a tad bit excessive and they could’ve carried him away with an office on each of his limbs. the fact is is that it was around the time that they would have carded anybody and he didn’t cooperate. i dunno, you be the judge on this one.

  5. November 29, 2006 3:40 pm

    Richad,

    wasn’t trying to say that this was because he was Muslim. I merely pointed out that it was common sense that he may be Muslim or that he would play the race card when he started screaming about the Patriot Act.

    Whether this was race inspired, none of us could really know for sure besides the cop doing the tazering.

    Now, I haven’t read theylion’s article yet, but it looks like he may have some additional information that is very damning for the officer in question. Please go to theylions site to check out that story, if you haven’t allready.

  6. Rob permalink
    December 1, 2006 12:15 am

    Last time I checked, tazering someone leaves them in shock and the person is not able to move for a period of time due to the disorientation from the shock of a tazer. The tazer is a weapon to be used once to disorient and thats it. This is clearly abuse….Theres nothing more to it.

  7. December 1, 2006 12:18 am

    Rob, they used a dry tazer (?). It is a different form of tazering which does not leave the person in shock or disorientation. However, looking at the thrusting of the boys body when they tazered him the one time, I don’t see how he wouldn’t be in a state of shock.

  8. jcrue permalink
    December 4, 2006 3:12 pm

    let’s not forget that the student had his ID on him, had posted to the internet his distain for authority and his desire to “do something” that will get noticed. he brought it on himself. he made the choices that led to his removal in this manner.

  9. jcrue permalink
    December 4, 2006 3:13 pm

    the Patriot Act stuff was hysterical. what if anything does that have to do with what was happening?

    these college kids are so poorly educacted it seems.

  10. Sarah permalink
    December 5, 2006 8:52 pm

    The kid was just angry that they would grab and taser him, so he just said what he thought (about the patriot act). When we all get angry at someone we just shut out everything bad and everything that was held inside of us at them. At the end, he said it when he was very angry, and although he may have meant what he said, I doubt he said it to cause international attention. Also, the police were definitely wrong in using a taser gun. They exceeded their jobs and that is wrong!

  11. jcrue permalink
    December 5, 2006 9:25 pm

    the police in no way “exceeded” their jobs. they may have over-reacted as some would argue, but using a taser on a non-compliant idividual in custody is part of their job when necessary.

    think of it this way, they could have used nightsticks to imposed pain-induced compliance.

  12. Darkwren permalink
    December 5, 2006 9:34 pm

    Actually a few of you should go over the amendments in the Patriot Act a bit more carefully. The following essentially authorises any law enforcement official to abuse their power on a whim.

    SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

    (a) Domestic Terrorism Defined.–Section 2331 of title 18, United
    States Code, is amended–
    (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking “by assassination
    or kidnapping” and inserting “by mass destruction,
    assassination, or kidnapping”;
    (2) in paragraph (3), by striking “and”;
    (3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and
    inserting “; and”; and
    (4) by adding at the end the following:
    “(5) the term `domestic terrorism’ means activities that–
    “(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are
    a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or
    of any State;
    “(B) appear to be intended–
    “(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian
    population;
    “(ii) to influence the policy of a government
    by intimidation or coercion; or
    “(iii) to affect the conduct of a government
    by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;
    and
    “(C) occur primarily within the territorial
    jurisdiction of the United States.”.

    Under 5A, law enforcement can simply say that they “believed” the individual was involved in a dangerous act. 5B uses the term “coercion”, which could be interpreted as showing any signs of free thought or speech. 5C is moot in this case since this entire section is enacts a domestic scope.

    All in all and regardless of what that kid did or did not do, the police were in the wrong. If they wanted to arrest him, they should have cuffed him and carried him out. No violence was necessary.

  13. December 5, 2006 10:59 pm

    jcrue – I really do appreciate sources to back up statements. So as far as the ID goes and his statements on the internet, could you please provide a link?

    Also, please look at comment number 5 for the link to the whole article:

    One of the cops caught on video repeatedly tasering a Muslim student at UCLA has been the subject of controversy before. The LA Times reported last week: The UCLA police officer videotaped last week using a Taser gun on a student also shot a homeless man at a campus study hall room three years ago and was earlier recommended for dismissal in connection with an alleged assault on fraternity row, authorities said

  14. December 5, 2006 11:03 pm

    Sarah and jcrue – as far as the patriot act goes – I think any person with common sense would have said – wait a minute, this might turn into something more serious. This person may being setting us up for a lawsuit. This person may think I’m a bigot.

    There were plenty of capable individuals at the location to carry this boy out.

    The amount of times that the boy was tazered was excessive. He was handcuffed, he was not a threat. It was abuse of power.

  15. jcrue permalink
    December 8, 2006 6:51 pm

    For references to the Facebook postings of the idiot and his possible possesion of his ID at the time see the postings of an eye-witness to the event at http://messageboard.tuckermax.com/search.php?searchid=1677423

    Enjoy🙂

    You’ve never been in a position of authority or real responsiblity for the safety of others have you, Samaha?

  16. billy norton permalink
    December 20, 2006 10:24 pm

    “You’ve never been in a position of authority or real responsiblity for the safety of others have you, Samaha?” In response to your comment, I got a question for you jcrue, how is a student at a university walking into a library without an id UNSAFE?!

  17. jcrue permalink
    December 28, 2006 5:51 pm

    Well, Billy-boy,

    He had his ID on his person, Tabatabainejad has admitted this. He choose not to show it because he claimed to have been racially profiled and the only patron of the library to be asked for his ID card (http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=39027).

    How is anyone not willing to comply with rules set in place for the safety of others considered SAFE?

    Is this how you would approach the situation? Assuming everyone is safe waiting for the contrary to be demonstrated? At what cost?

    How do you know any individual is a student? The tattoo on their forehead? The backpack they carried? Or the freakin’ ID requested of them?!?!?!?

    I guess I can just go get a UCLA backpack and hang in the library all night and expect to be allowed to wander the halls with you on duty. That’s good to know…. Screw the safety of others as long as we’re assuming everyone is “safe”, is that your argument?

  18. January 3, 2007 4:58 pm

    jcrue

    first off – I did take a look at your link (and it has been a while) but I didn’t really see the relevance of it nor do I see the relevance of your last comment, nor did I see the relevance of your comment stating that I have never been in a position in caring of the safety of others.

    I thought we were talking about the excessive nature of the tazering. Am I wrong?

    The guy was repeatedly EXCESSIVELY tazered WHILE HANDCUFFED – what is so hard to understand about that?

    Show me how being tazered that many times WHILE HANDCUFFED is ACCEPTABLE behaviour on the part of the police officers.

    They could easily have picked him up and carried him out – THAT DOES HAPPEN OFTEN – police picking up and carrying out suspects.

    Now, I have no problem discussing and even agree that the boy had not acted responsibly, deserved to be kicked out, possibly arrested – BUT, there is NOW WAY IN HELL that I am going to say that the police did not use EXCESSIVE force. Watch the video again.

  19. jcrue permalink
    January 4, 2007 7:18 pm

    What may enlighten you is to know what I consider excessive makes this look like a spanking given to a child. This point of view comes with having been in an occupation where the safety of others is involved. There’s your relevance.

    Getting a small shot of lightening in your ass a few times is laughable compared to what is really going on out there and what is possible.

    Rodney King was excessive. This is no where close.

    How about this? Take the tazers away and give the cops their nightsticks back.

  20. January 9, 2007 6:34 pm

    jcrue – small shot of lightning? does someone have to die for you to say it was excessive?

    January 8, 2007

    As Taser International Unveils Newest Civilian Stun Device, Amnesty International USA Renews Call for an Independent Safety Review
    Human Rights Organization Cites Two Recent TASER-Related Deaths as Cause for Continuing Concern

    “(New York) — As Taser International, Inc. introduces its latest version of its civilian stun device today, Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) noted two TASER-related deaths that occurred over the weekend and renewed its call for an independent and comprehensive study into their use.

    “How many deaths related to these devices must occur before we have concrete, impartial information that accurately describes the potential dangers of use?” said Larry Cox, executive director for AIUSA. “In the hands of police officers, TASERs have been a questionable weapon at best. More than 220 people in the United States have died after being shocked with TASERs — imagine the devastating consequences when they are put in the hands of the average Joe or Josephine. Clearly, there are reasons for concern.”

    According to news reports, a 45-year-old man died in Ft. Pierce, Fla., on Saturday as police tried to subdue him in the back of a patrol car, and in Queens, NY, an emotionally disturbed man died in a family member?s home after the police used a TASER to subdue him. He went into cardiac arrest and died at Franklin General Hospital.

    AIUSA is particularly concerned that vulnerable groups such as children, the disabled, pregnant women and people with mental illnesses are being subjected to electric shocks from TASERs. The organization has received reports of individuals being TASERed while already handcuffed or having been placed in mechanical restraints. It has also received reports of TASERs being used to control unruly or uncooperative schoolchildren.

    Studies conducted have not met the organization’s criteria for an independent, impartial and comprehensive study. These studies have been limited in scope and methodology or have been biased by the involvement by a primary manufacturer of the weapons — Taser International — and police departments themselves. None of the studies has included an analysis of the deaths listed in Amnesty International’s reports on TASER use in the United States.”

    http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGUSA20070108001

  21. sapphrine permalink
    January 18, 2007 2:37 pm

    If this had happened in the UK those officers would have been arrested at best for their actions and lynched at worst and I doubt much more would be made of it.

    If i’m reading right this student did not have ID and left slowly after being asked to leave. When the officer put a hand on him he objected loudly and was then shot with a taser. Where the hell is that an ok response? You wont leave quietly so we’ll taser you. I’d be suing for misuse of power. The fact they tasered him 3 times for this seems not only exessive but cruel and unusual as well. I call that torture. So we have 3 officers for 1 unarmed student who argues and then after being hit by a taser and shouting he has a medical condition is then tasered twice more by officers who could have happily taken him out of the building as it was without him needing to stand. If they hadn’t tasered him in the first place they wouldn’t have had this problem.

    I’m more upset that the students did nothing to respond. I am fairly confident that the police would have been mobbed and put under citizens arrest after the second tasering of the student in the UK and certainly after the 3rd. Just because they are Police Officers does not make them above the law. As it is they should answer for their actions.

    To those trolls commenting above saying that the student had it coming. I would ask any of you to be tasered, dry or otherwise and see how well you stand when your muscles are still spasming. If you survive the first one, try it twice and see if you can stand then.

    Police have a responsibilty to protect, this does not mean they must be brutal. As a result of watching that movie I have a hell of a lot less respect for American Police in general and particularly on that campus and will be far more cynical if i ever have to deal with them. I doubt many watching will think it was justifiable use of force.

  22. sapphrine permalink
    January 18, 2007 2:45 pm

    in response to jcrue,
    ‘He had his ID on his person, Tabatabainejad has admitted this. He choose not to show it because he claimed to have been racially profiled and the only patron of the library to be asked for his ID card’ (http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=39027).

    So the student refused to show ID. He was asked to leave as a result and was leaving. Why does he need to be tasered to get him to leave? Because he’s arguing? Because he’s walking too slow? What is next? He sighed before standing. Maybe that is a good enough reason.

    I fail to see how a student that whilst complaining is still complying with the request to leave requires tasering. I also fail to see why arresting him with 3-1 odds wasn’t an option without a taser. I fail to see why carrying him out after he was tasered and stated he had a medical condition wasn’t a reasonable response and I don’t see how the officers felt that threatening a student near by with tasering for asking for their ID is acceptable.

    Being responsible for the safety of others doesn’t require you to just shoot anyone you think might be a threat. This is why we don’t condone vigilantism. Being responsible for other peoples safety and an officer of the law requires you to UPHOLD the law above all other things.

  23. Andreas permalink
    January 19, 2007 9:07 am

    Sorry, but did anyone here realize that such stories ONLY happed in the US of fuckin’ A? And that this stuff is obviously seen from millions of others all around the world? And also from students (which means, people with a higher intellect than the average scumbag). I mean, this really would frighten me…if I were an intelligent and liberal American…

  24. jcrue permalink
    January 22, 2007 4:11 pm

    Sapphire, you wasted a lot of time and typing to say very little.

    If you had ever been in a place where you were responsible for others’ safety and truly had a more accurate understanding of what happened that night in the library, I would respond to your diatribe of nonsense and emotional gushing.

    The times I have been tazed, I recovered in a matter of seconds. What about you Sapphire?

  25. January 22, 2007 6:46 pm

    I think that the biggest issue here is that the guy was handcuffed as he was being tazered, a point which seems to be overlooked by you over and over again jcrue.

    This wasn’t about subduing a dangerous student so that they could make an arrest. He’s handcuffed and he is repeatedly tazered. In the end he is carried out anyway.

    Hmmmmm….

  26. jcrue permalink
    January 24, 2007 8:43 pm

    if you think someone in handcuffs is not dangerous you are really ignorant of what is to be in law enforcement especially when the individual has demonstrated behaviors associated with mind-altering and behavior-changing drugs.

    saw something you all would benefit from reading. at least then you would see who someone who is much more eloquent than me sees this incident – http://media.www.dailytrojan.com/media/storage/paper679/news/2007/01/24/Opinion/Ucla-Tasering.Hardly.A.Civil.Rights.Violation-2670277.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dailytrojan.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com

    the commenters on this thread remind of something a professor I admire once said.

    “Abstract ethics or soapbox lectures demanding superhuman perfection mean little without deeds.” – Victor Davis Hanson

  27. January 29, 2007 6:19 pm

    I don’t know about elequoent. It is apparently an opinion and from what I’ve read in the papers and such, it seems to be an ill informed opinion.

    I’m sorry, no, unless the man was a ticking timebomb, I don’t see him as a threat in handcuffs. Let’s say he was a human bomb – well, it certainly didn’t make sense to taze away at him like that.

  28. jcrue permalink
    January 30, 2007 2:04 pm

    so basically no one gets tazered, i get it. let ’em all run wild, let ’em all do what they want with no consequences.

    i do agree with you one thing, we should use tazers less, but i also believe we should use nightsticks more.

Trackbacks

  1. The Comment of all Comments (at least on my blog) « Samaha
  2. a history of violence « they lion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: