digg

Join DiggAbout

UF Student tasered at John Kerry Speech watch!

youtube.com — I couldnt get to my camera in time to record his entrance, but this guy basically comes running in with 4 or 5 cops in tow and says he has been running around trying to get in to ask a question and the cops are going to arrest him for it. they almost do it then but Sen. Kerry says he will answer it. he then answers a previous question someone else

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • fozzymandias, on 10/10/2007, -138/+57come on people digg this so it gets seen
    • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -49/+112I'm against police abuse as much as the next person, but when the cops come to escort him out of the facility he fights back. He didn't attack the police, but he did try and break free from them and fought back. If you do that you are going to get arrested.
      Please see Chris Rock's lecture on how not to get shot by the police for further instructions.

      And it is not a free speech thing. This is a ticket event, even if there were empty seats.
      • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -9/+24Apologies "How Not to Get Your Ass Kicked by the Police..."
      • firekhan, on 10/10/2007, -72/+8IVE JUST WATCHED THIS BLOG SINCE IT WAS POSTED AND STRAIGHT AWAY IT WAS DUGG DOWN, I GUESS THE POWERS THAT BE KNOW THE INFLUENCE IT HAS ON PUBLIC OPINION AND HAVE A TEAM OF PPL READY TO DIGG AWAY IN THEIR INTERESTS.
        • MasterSref, on 10/10/2007, -7/+17either that, or not everyone agrees with your point of view on the matter
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -7/+33why are you yelling, turn you caps lock off you are hurting my eyes
          • wafflez, on 10/10/2007, -18/+10BUT IT'S CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!
            >_>
        • Smegzor, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Dugg down for anal use of caps.
          • ufia, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11He has every rights to type in all caps because he is voting for Ron Paul. You people and your lowercase are government shills.
          • thetrza, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Dugg up for use of the word anal.
      • tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -23/+36Good post. Some common sense and reason instead of the common Digg assumption that police + taser = brutality.
        • quisph, on 10/10/2007, -14/+261) The police never should have intervened in the first place. He had done nothing wrong.
          2) Once they started "escorting" him out, he tried to break away. This was really the only thing he did wrong.
          3) Police + Taser DOES equal brutality when the suspect poses no immediate threat to anyone. He was unarmed, outnumbered, already physically restrained, *lying on the floor*, and he had verbally agreed to leave. Do you honestly think he was likely to harm anyone at that point? They used the Taser out of convenience, not out of necessity.
          4) Please note that saying that he shouldn't have been tased is not the same thing as saying he shouldn't have been *arrested*. Arresting him was appropriate, but tasing him was not necessary. There is a difference.
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -9/+14Listen to the audio. They gave him fare warning. They specifically told him he would be tased if he didn't comply. He chose not to comply, then when the tasers came out, he shouted "Don't tase me!" while still refusing to comply. He made the choice.
          • robbh66, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Congrats, you're an idiot.

            1) The police never should have intervened in the first place. He had done nothing wrong.
            4) .... Arresting him was appropriate, but tasing him was not necessary...

            Which one is it?

            Furthermore, saying you'll leave peacefully the entire time you're struggling somewhat makes it unlikely the police will believe you when you continue to say it.
          • cdmonz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4No he is right, the police shouldn't have intervened, but when they did and he resisted it was appropriate to arrest him.
        • ddawggin, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Crashing a ticketed function is illegal, and at a private function the host reserves the right to remove any people they want to. Besides, how do I know that a person crazy enough to think John Kerry gives a damn what he says isn't crazy enough to have a gun?
      • bs0l, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Totally agree with you man.

        However I do feel it's kind of bad to do it in front of so many people, it's pretty disgusting. I know they were having trouble controlling him and all though.
        • rosedigg, on 10/10/2007, -6/+22They were trying to get him out of there, he was fighting it.
      • wootup, on 10/10/2007, -27/+33When nonviolent civil disobedience results in electrical torture, we have a big problem.
        When people justify electrical torture against someone exercising nonviolent civil disobedience, we have an even bigger problem: people who have adopted their rulers' rationalities and goals as their own.

        Don't listen to the cowards and apologists: this is how freedom dies.
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -7/+11Fight the right battles man. Watch this video http://www.starbanner.com/article/20070917/NEWS/70917006/1053/BREAKING_NEWS
          This is not nonviolent civil disobedience.
        • wootup, on 10/10/2007, -17/+13DrDigg -
          Where is the student's violence? He isn't attacking anybody, or threatening anybody. He is trying to get away from the police to hear the answer to the question he asked.
          Again, adopting your rulers' rationalities and goals as your own.
          This is how freedom dies.
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14I think you are seeing what you want to see here. The police go to escort him out and his thrusts up his arms and heads towards the stage. He fights against the police. This has nothing to do with freedom dying.
          • oddmanout, on 10/10/2007, -8/+16no one is arguing that he wasn't being disruptive. the law says you can't be tasered unless you're trying to cause physical harm... show me where in the video he's tyring to hurt someone. They tasered him out of conveniece..; it was easier for them to taser him than to pick him up.
          • bungoman, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3The problem isn't that he thrust his arms up. The problem is the police tried to forcibly remove him in the first place, even after Kerry seemed to make it clear he was ok with him asking the question.
        • wootup, on 10/10/2007, -11/+13So where, again, was his "violence"? He didn't attack anybody or threaten to attack anybody. He was not hurting anybody and was not attempting to hurt anybody.
          How is using violence against somebody who is not being violent - whether that be electrocuting them or having armed goons drag them out of a crowded theater - justified? Why are you defending violence against your fellow human beings? This type of goon squad repression does nothing for you, me, or the advancement of meaningful freedom. Quite the opposite, in fact. But it does something for your rulers: keep the rest of the populace frightened to ever speak up or resist.
          • TubaTechno, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Who said he needed to attack anyone or threaten to hurt anyone in order to be arrested? Causing a disturbance during a private function was means enough to be escorted out. He did not comply with the requests of the officers and therefore was man handled out. He kept resisting and not complying with the orders and therefore was tasered so that they could more easily restrain him. The police were using "violence" (as you call it) or as I define it "acts of aggression" towards the student because when they decided to place him under arrest for causing a disturbance, he resisted and was using force against the police officers.

            You may have your speil all about "freedoms" in this country, but spinning this to where the student "did no wrong" is absolutely absurd.
          • wootup, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2So, again, "not comply[ing]" (nonviolent resistance) = electrical torture?
            Authoritarianism is a serious problem.
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -7/+16You do people like M.L. King Jr. a disservice by lumping in this gentleman and his actions as a nonviolent protest. Watch the other video I attached. They try and peacefully escort him out of this private function and he resists. He is not defending our rights, he is trespassing and then resisting arrest. He was violent first, not the cops.
        • schuder, on 10/10/2007, -6/+13And if he tried to resist, successfully rushed the stage and injured or killed Senator Kerry, then it would have been the polices' fault as well. When you have a high profile person, you don't let a combative/unstable person run amok.
          • oddmanout, on 10/10/2007, -9/+10great, so torture everyone "just in case" right? no way, regardless of who is on the stage, they need to stay within the law
          • ddawggin, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Yes, that was torture. Torture on my ears to listen to his high-pitched crying. Schuder has it right, no matter what its the police's fault. Either they are too defensive of a prominent person or the prominent person dies. I think I'd rather see 1,000 whiny trespassers get their just reward for breaking the law and not complying with the police before I'd like to see John Kerry dies. Which is saying something, cause I do NOT like John Kerry.
        • wootup, on 10/10/2007, -7/+12DrDigg - I have watched both videos. He doesn't attack anybody in either, and he doesn't threaten anybody in either. When police try to use violence against him - when all he's doing is asking a series of totally legitimate questions - he tries to pull away so that he can hear the answer to his question. Several times he asks "What have I done wrong?" which, you will notice, none of the police answer, because all things considered, he hasn't done much of anything wrong. Accusing him of having been "violent" is a joke. You also ignored my question (for obvious reasons), so I will re-state it: How is using violence against somebody who is not being violent justified?
          schuder - What does that have to do with anything? He asked John Kerry several questions - several important questions, I think - and that's all. I think it speaks volumes of your pro-establishment bias when you see a video of state-on-citizen violence and emerge from it with a rhetorical question about nonexistant citizen-on-state violence.
          • mbolgian, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12I'm not defending the cops here, but the reason they don't tell him what he's done wrong is because they're not interested in having a debate with him at that point. Once they get things under control, then they address his questions and let him know what he's being arrested for.
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -6/+12I consider that being violent. Forcing your arms up in a threatening fashion and rushing towards the stage (even if it is a few steps) is a violent action. The police had to take control of the situation before he became a danger to others of further danger to himself. That is the answer to your question. If someone approached you and did that you would call the police for help. He has trespassed and was being escorted out. Once again you fail to distinguish the difference between private property and public arena. This was a ticketed event = private event. He does not have the right to ask the speaker any questions. Plus if you read any further on the incident you will see that he forced himself into the event. Further evidence that he knowingly was trespassing. I think this is going no where, lets just agree to disagree.

          P.S. I don't have pro-establishment bias. I almost vomited when I saw the video of the kid in Missouri get harassed by the cop in the parking lot. My blood boiled when I read the story about the guy getting arrested for not showing his receipt. I hate the "patriot act" and am scared about the way this country is heading. That being said - this is not the battle to fight - there are many more that you and I can stand side by side on.
          • sabach, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The cops were righteous until the taser, it wasn't yet to that point. Here's what I don't understand, why couldn't they get the cuffs on him? I mean there was about 5 or 6 of them. He was a skinny journalism student, come on. I could've subdued and cuffed that little geek by myself and had him out of there in 45 seconds or so. I think the local police chief needs to schedule some training.
          • sjaaksken, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2@drdigg

            A few things I don't understand from your comments:

            A) If you ask J. Kerry POLITICAL questions (which is NOT a crime), and you are upon that removed by the police, wouldn't you assume they're removing you because of your LEGITIMATE questions? There's no such thing as the police having the freedom of removing you because you ask a question.

            B) You say it's a private ticketed event. Isn't it strange that for a private event the police has to be present and only actually removes people when they start asking difficult questions? Don't you see how the 'PRIVATE' part in the event doesn't mean you can tazer anyone you like, just because they are 'tresspassing'? There is a very understandable reason why that student showed up and had the guts to ask his important questions. It's sad you see that as illegal and reason to tazer him.

            Which leads to this: imagine that the Brittish would've made it illegal for ghandi to attend or even be in the vicinity of any political meeting. Saying that he being around protesting and giving a clear sign that he did not agree with the authorities would've been 'trespassing' or 'he shouldn't ve been there in the first place' is just plain stupid. Maybe they should've tasered every protester on the world ever than. Something the Chinese will love to hear. Actually the USA is turning more and more into the Chinese government, Tien An Men protest was illegal too after all, and hell, they were signing and shouting. What IF they stormed the communist party, and did something awful to them? So to use your words, to take control of the situation before they became a danger to others or further damage themselves, the police decided to use violenc, so in your eyes their intervention was legit? In fact, there's no difference between Tien an Men and this event, only in China it wasn't one student but thousands, the reasoning behind the intervention 's the same.

            Oh right, I forgot, I dared to compare China and US. You should taser me!
      • TheG2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8http://youtube.com/watch?v=Fhq0NDkUViQ

        Public Service Announcement.
    • ruddy, on 10/10/2007, -13/+47if the camera man didnt have turrets maybe i could see what the hell just happened.
    • AgentKPB, on 10/10/2007, -31/+9I like Digg and all but man, you are all a bunch of whiny little babies. Please, cry some more you little pussy
    • Pake, on 10/10/2007, -32/+62This should be listed as "An Idiots Guide to Hording Sheep:"
      1) Find a Peace, Anti-War, Anti-Bush, or any political event.
      2) Enter said event.
      3) Act like a general *****.
      4) Fight the cops.
      5) Get arrested/tazered/etc.
      6) Go to the police station and get released.
      7) Write in your blog about how you did absolutely NOTHING wrong and how the man is trying to keep you down.
      8) Submit the blog entry to Digg.
      9) ???
      10) Profit!
      • WilliamDavis, on 10/10/2007, -7/+8"5) Get arrested/tazered/etc."

        Those two don't belong together. Tazers are claimed to be used instead of guns. Who's arguing that this kid needed to be shot?
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9If they were truly meant as a substitute, cops would have to rush to get within tazoring distance of people pointing guns at them That's why Tazers aren't meant to replace guns, but rather control situations before guns might be needed.
        • rednorth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2...and replace skills of normal police diplomacy in the process.

          stop and think. this is a serious shift. this is the stuff of police states, of fascist regimes.

          STOP AND THINK.
    • schuder, on 10/10/2007, -22/+11That was so cool. Prick had it coming. As a representative of me (being from Massachusetts), John Kerry deserves to be treated with respect (even though I didn't vote for him). When you try to talk down to a representative of the people you are doing a disservice to everyone. You could tell by his tone that he was looking for a fight and he got one. If he didn't look for it why didn't he just say, "Senator Kerry, there's been a lot of documented voter fraud in the 2004 election, why did you concede so early?" But he kept ranting on and on and he had it coming. People didn't pay to see this punk rant, sure he has a blog or some *****.
      That's some nice work Lou.
      • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8And what the hell with the Skull and Bones crap. I mean you can have your problems with the guy, but that is just a little crazy. Did you hear the people in the crowd laugh at him with that one.
        • danarama, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3uh it's true? him and bush together playing voodoo games at yale. no *****.
          • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Everyone knows they were in it. That is why it is funny. Not a very good secret if everyone knows it.
            P.S. for the love of god don't see the movie, it will make your eyes and ears bleed it is so bad
    • Sagags, on 10/10/2007, -7/+8Even though the kids message made some since you guys forget that this is private property, if the person running the speech wanted the kid out of their building they have a right to make him leave, it is THERE building, its private property, I could understand if it was a public area but this isn't. They had every right to do that. Those might not even be police but maybe private security.
      • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I agree completely with your statement, but they are UPD (university police dept). I just left gainesville after seven years there. They are real cops who will actually ticket you for going 22 in a 20...I kid you not.
        • numb401, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2hell they ticket you on a bike for headphones or riding with no hands
        • elfjuice, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1numb401,
          Your right, why should the police waste their time with idiots who ride bikes, no-handed with headphones on. I think we should let natural selection weed these idiots out. If your stupid enough to do that, then you deserve to get hit by a passing bus / car.
      • oddmanout, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4i agree with you on the leaving part, but i really don't agree that then can just whip out the taser and torture someone just for being on their property
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9The guy had a chance to comply. He chose not to take it.
      • locitman, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3THERE building, THERE castle...
        • JollyRogerBass, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That is neither here nor there.
    • hammerpants, on 10/10/2007, -11/+10It is illegal for the police to arrest you for no reason. If they do not have legal cause to arrest you, you have the right to defend yourself, just as if a "regular citizen" were trying to put you in handcuffs. Police are, indeed, citizens, and they are bound by the same laws we are.

      This guy was arrested for defending himself against the police officers' actions to stop him from speaking. They had no right. He had the right to defend himself with whatever force necessary. They were fortunate he didn't.
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10"If they do not have legal cause to arrest you, you have the right to defend yourself"

        In court. Not by resisting arrest.


      • phuibonhoa, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Ticketed event. He had no ticket. They tried to escort him out, he resisted and even took a couple steps toward Kerry.
    • d3k4y, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2Why didn't you hold the damn camera still? If you are trying to present evidence, all this proves is someone being arrested at a private event for refusing to leave. Using the term "blow job" in front a of this crowd doesn't really build his credibility either,
    • television, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4D: that send chills down my spine, too often do I see this happen to people wanting to express their opinions when living in the United States. I'm just glad I don't live there. In anycase I have alot of respect to that lad - good on you mate, speak your mind and never give in to the suppresor.
      • TubaTechno, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2too often you see this happen to Americans expressing their opinions? Do you LIVE at Digg?

        Holy please get educated....
    • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4POLICE STATE! POLICE STATE! John Kerry is Hitler! They trampled this boy's right to freedom of speech! He didn't need a permit! He could yell and run around and do whatever he pleases, this is AMERICA! And that means the right to be big annoying ***** like most anti-war protesters! POLICE STATE! POLICE STATE!
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8When they start doing this to White people... I'm out! *flee's country*

      Good Luck, bitches.
  • Providence, on 10/10/2007, -104/+42At Fozzy: Don't comment on your own videos.

    I currently reside in a dorm at the University of Florida. John Kerry did speak today at the University Auditorium, from what I've read in the campus newspapers. Although it is despicable what these cops did, barging in on a ticket-based speaking engagement is kinda asking for it.
    • IKEARiot, on 10/10/2007, -21/+58Wow, you're a real American hero. Describing the Police action as despicable and then trying to justify it. You're the *****, mate.
    • normmccray, on 10/10/2007, -9/+38Actually, while the *free* tickets assured entrance to the event, they were letting people in without them. There were probably 50 or 60 seats open the entire time, so the tickets really didn't mean much at all. As the poster of the video wrote, though, "to the cop haters: i have no doubt the cops were going exactly by the book, the problem isnt them, its the book! they were doing their job and looked just as confused as this kid (this isnt something that they deal with often)"
      • scubasteve377, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6"Holcomb said there would be an investigation into whether the officers used force appropriately, adding that employing a Taser gun would only be justified in a case where there was a threat of physical harm to officers."
        http://www.starbanner.com/article/20070917/NEWS/70917006/1053/BREAKING_NEWS

        The video from the link above very clearly shows their was no threat to the officers. He was tazed because he was he was being non-compliant. That is not going "by the book." Police should no longer be allowed to carry tazers, as they have demonstrated on numerous occasions they cannot be trusted to use them appropriately.
        • digguserer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Right. Because there was no abuse by police when they had billy clubs instead of tazers.
          • acdcfanbill, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5It's pretty hard to hide evidence of mistreatment with a billy club.
        • gonegoogling, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1"used force appropriately"= oxymoron. scubasteve= moron
          • TubaTechno, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"case where there was a threat of physical harm to officers"

            He was resisting arrest. That by the law's definition states that there is physical violence against the police officers.
      • skyfire1, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Way to go copying the youtube description.
    • whataboutdave, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17@ Providence

      If you're going to criticize someone's Digg etiquette, you should at least use the comment system in the way it was designed to be used.
      • jon3k, on 10/10/2007, -10/+8@Providence
        Yeah totally. Just the other day, I robbed a bank, and when the cops showed up I said "Hey let me go and I'll just walk out of here now" and would you believe those pigs ARRESTED ME?!
        • XBSHX, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3Are you dumb? How does this compare to robbing a bank? He didn't commit any crime at all.
          • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Trespassing, battery on a police officer, and resisting arrest. Basically everything he did after they tried to walk him out. If you do not leave with the police when they try and escort you from a private function you are committing a crime. Obviously not bank robbery, but he will be visiting a judge soon.
    • thekinneret, on 10/10/2007, -22/+9I agree 100%! The cops were just doing their job. The student was obviously acting violent and was threatening Kerry. I think people need to act orderly at these events or else things don't go well. I realize the whole free speech thing and all, but it's not the most important thing. Safety > free speech always. Free speech is just a perk.
      • stevelucky, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14I can't tell if that's sarcasm or not, but I sure hope it is. Free speech is just a perk? You've got to be kidding me right? It's a good thing the bill of rights has those kinds of perks written in it or people like you would make this the "safest" place in the world.
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8You don't have freedom of speech in a private conference. In other words I can't go into your house and yell at you and expect to not get in trouble. This was a ticketed event, not on a public street.
      • schuder, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Free speech does have limits. For instance I can't jump the White House fence to tell Mr. Bush I don't like the way he's running the country. That would result in being blindsided by secret service. If he weren't acting like a dick and fighting the police, he would have been escorted out. Again, they didn't come here to see him speak, they came to see Kerry. No one wants to listen to that turd bitch about everything.
        • Sethd85, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Yes, of course schuder, let's not let the dissenter speak his mind. Heavens no. That would make us less than a totalitarian regime.

          oh, wait...
        • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2freedom of speech? he wasn't harming anyone or staring any riots or putting anyone in danger...and kerry wanted to answer his question.
      • jarjarjanks, on 10/10/2007, -7/+14the nazis were "just doing their jobs" too ya know
        • DrDigg, on 10/10/2007, -9/+5way to trivialize the death of 8 million people
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4It's just jarjar. I've run into him before. He's a big proponent of Godwin's Law.
    • F0rtysxity, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1if you cut in front of someone at the supermarket line and he proceeds to punch you in the face and then say, "You know, he was asking for it." i think you'd agree with me in saying that the assaulter was acting like a total douche
  • FTWvarien, on 11/12/2007, -68/+505that's definitely messed up. besides, he said "get off of me and i'll leave" and they continued tasering him. plus they let him in and kerry let him ask a question...there wouldn't have been a problem if he had said "how do you feel about the gators?". It just turns out that the student is very opinionated, and i guess there's a problem with people in this country having opinions? He wasn't calling for a riot or doing anything that would lead to violence, just using words.
    • Castronaut, on 10/11/2007, -42/+94The youtube video said that he barged in after some sort of confrontation with the police. When they try to escort him out with force he resists. At that point I don't think I would listen to "get off me and i'll leave". I'm not condoning the tasering, just saying that the guy is certainly not a martyr. Anyhow, feel free to digg me down for not crying "POLICE STATE" everybody.
      • KrazyA1pha, on 10/11/2007, -13/+24"Anyhow, feel free to digg me down for not crying "POLICE STATE" everybody."

        Your amazing reverse psychology is too strong... If I digg you down I'm doing what you want me to do.... If I digg you up, I'm going against my very will... Circuits... shorting...
        • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -22/+12It isn't reverse psychology. If I actually gave a damn about being dugg down then I wouldn't ever leave a comment because I don't agree with most of the cult of personality on digg.
          • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14If you didn't give a damn, then you wouldn't have had to point it out in the first place. Next time, feel free to save yourself the time typing, because frankly we don't give a ***** either.
          • stephant, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4I like that reasoning p0tent1al (1337 name by the way, seriously). By your logic, when commenting that he doesn't give a damn, he simply proves he gives a damn. You are critical of his method then to show you don't give a ***** you comment that you don't give a *****. You are as 1337 as your name implies.
          • thrallie, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20You're all idiots.
      • madpie, on 10/10/2007, -17/+30leave it to Digg to find an apologist for police tasering a guy for asking a question.
        • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -9/+22Or for a guy repeatedly trying to resist being escorted out of a place that he wasn't invited into in the first place. Leave it to digg to believe that every police officer is out to turn the country into 1984, a book they just recently discovered.
          • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Dont we all love generalizations?

            how do you know he wasn't invited there?
            and no we are not against every policemen, but only those "out to turn the country into 1984", a book most understand better than you probably ever could.
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+19Castro is right. He wasn't tasered for asking a question. He wasn't tazered to get him out of the building either. He was tazered for continually resisting arrest. THis is how it goes down.

          Guy asks a disruptive question = No crime
          Guy is asked to leave and does = No crime
          Guy is peacefully escorted away = No crime
          Guy forcefully resists being escorted away = Crime

          You don't scuffle with police, even if you're in the right. You go peacefully -- and if an arrest is involved, you let your attorney and the courts sort it out.
          • kingsaliva, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Is it ok, that after they have you on the ground, surrounded by six officers, that they taze him?
          • khellendros1984, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Maybe they considered him dangerous? Many people have really ***** judgment, and there's nothing stopping them from becoming cops.
      • ghettodev, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3I'm conflicted. Do I digg you up for making some good points or do I digg you down for "feel free to digg me down" whining?
        • atdigg, on 10/24/2007, -2/+2who cares what you decide to do, as if it matters how many diggs one post receives...
    • 46reasons, on 10/10/2007, -26/+77Uh yeah, when you create a disturbance and then resist arrest, you're not going to be able to "just leave."
      • fatloui, on 10/10/2007, -9/+17when the current president cheated to get in office then lied his way thru the next four years, and no one does anything about, we need a ***** disturbance. The police's job is to protect and serve the people, not the president, and the people in that auditorium were clearly happy to hear this guy, and in no way threatened by him, so the police should stop and use some logic for once instead of being mindless robots.
        • urinnerchild87, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3"happy to hear the guy?" The camera man was laughing at the guy, and when the police started to take to guy away, everyone clapped. Only when they tasered the guy did people start whining about police brutality.
          • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2watch it again. the cameraman laughed at his rude question and not at the guy himself. there's a difference. and can you tell the exact moment in the video when everyone was clapping? but, of course, i am sure you couldnt be bothered.
          • fatloui, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2yeah, they are laughing at what he is saying. People who laugh at Jon Stewart aren't mocking him, it's because they believe it to be true and he bluntly puts it out there. Everyone was clapping for him, not the cops (they started clapping before they took him away).
      • CraigCarlyle, on 10/10/2007, -8/+10Since when was questioning authority considered a disturbance?
        • soupdawg30, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2When you barge in being followed by police.
        • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4disturbance or not, we should all question authority. how do you think this country was founded
      • defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2I think he could have gone on asking the question if he hadn't said "blow job."
    • CosmoLoss, on 10/10/2007, -30/+23If he knew he was doing nothing wrong, he should have gone quietly. No charges would have been pressed. But he broke the law when he resisted arrest. Not to say that he should have been tased for asking a question, but he was out of control.

      Dig me down!
      • luckykpolice, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14will do
      • vemerge, on 10/10/2007, -2/+34University cops shouldn't have the authority to taser people.
        • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1my opinion is did they even need to? there was like 5 officers. it obviously didn't help and it just mad his case stronger
      • tyywebb, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14How did he brake the law again?
        • XBSHX, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5he didn't, the cops were the one who were using force when the guy tried to leave.
          • jcounterman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Did you watch that video? The guy NEVER tried to leave. if anything, he walked TOWARD the podium.
          • jcounterman, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2***** double post....Digg's comment system crashes my browser constantly, and can't get them right when they do go through!
          • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1after they interrupted him repeatedly, and he didn't seem hostel, just adamant
        • jcounterman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13Tresspassing on an closed function (it was a ticket event and he didn't have a ticket). ANd then he would have been let go without incident if he hadn't BLATENTLY resisted arrest and struggled with the cops. He was TRYING to get attention.

          That being said, the cops went over the line and shouldn't have tasered him; but let's not paint this guy as a true saint. He knew he was being a dick.
        • ch4os1337, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1@jcounterman you have to sometimes to get to the truth
        • ch4os1337, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1@jcounterman you have to sometimes to get to the truth
        • zoom1928, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4> How did he brake the law again?

          I've never heard that slang before. What does slowing down the law mean?
        • dxmzan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You mean you didn't seem him throwing elbows when they were dragging him out? You also should realize that resisting arrest doesn't have to be physical either.
    • Saea, on 10/10/2007, -8/+22Well, first of all, the police were probably going to do no more then escort him out and give him a talking to until he resisted and tried run BACK to the podium.

      I really enjoyed the whole hearted "Police Brutality" at the end though. Good job mister : ]
      • XBSHX, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5They don't have to use force to "escort" someone.
        • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8How exactly do you escort someone out without force? Ask nicely?
          • oddmanout, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2taze them, of course
          • urinnerchild87, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3funny enough, they did ask him several times. you can hear him refusing.
        • znachtman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12It appeared the police used extreme constraint initially. There are hundreds of police brutality videos on the Internet that are just absolutely horrible. This is not one of them. The police kindly attempted to escort him out of the auditorium. Upon refusing, and physically running in the direction of a U.S. Senator. They used force. They brought the kid down, asked him several times to comply with their orders. He did not. They told him to comply or he would be tasered (several times). He did not. He was tasered. How should the police have acted differently? At the end of the video, it looked like the kid was more of a danger to himself, than the police were. He appeared to be delusional.
          • oddmanout, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5"comply or be tazed" isn't legal. "comply or we'll force you is" they're only allowed to use the tazer if he's causing harm to them or someone else.
          • urinnerchild87, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"comply or be tazed" isn't legal. "comply or we'll force you is" they're only allowed to use the tazer if he's causing harm to them or someone else.

            you obviously have no idea what your talking about, and i have no idea why your being dugg up for it, but police can use the tazer any time they deem it necessary. Besides, what were they supposed to do, beat the ***** out of him, that would have gone over well. but your just another sheep digg user who has no idea what they're talking about.
          • lewscroo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes, he was running back towards the Senator. But I doubt it was likely he was actually heading back towards the microphone, which happened to be in between himself and Kerry. Cuz that certainly wouldn't make any sense. Assume the worst, that's the best motto.
        • Saea, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2"Umm... Mr. Big-Mouth, can you step over... umm... no, here... quietly would be kind... please stop..."

          And if that was a religious zealot, especially a Christian, you would praise the police

    • NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -15/+9It's sad that real free speech is not allowed here in the states... and it's sad when the truth is tasered and cheered out of the room... -_-
      We're trained in America... to believe the mainstream... and to look down on any other opinion or conspiracy theory...

      But what happens when those conspiracies are real? and everyone is just too blind... too brainwashed to even see it or even care about it...
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3How is "real free speech" not allowed in America? This page is getting a helluva lot more views than there were people in the crowd and many of the comments are anti-establishment. Seems like you can say whatever the hell you want.
    • airiox, on 10/10/2007, -29/+64Do these morons not understand the law? He barged in despite cops refusing him entrance. Then they allowed him to speak, probably because Kerry said to let him. He wouldn't shutup, the cops were being generous by even letting him speak. Then when he wouldn't shutup, they decide to get it over with. He resists there attempts to remove him. He pushes back and starts screaming like a little girl. The crowd starts to clap and cheer that he is being removed because he scared the crap out of all of them. Then he gets all girly man and yells "Help! Someone Help Me!!". The crowd stops its cheering. The cops take him down. He is still struggling, because he is just some rich snobbish little brat that doesn't respect authority. He won't stop squirming, so they taze him. Then they remove him, and the kid goes on asking for someone to follow them, because "They are gonna kill me, someone please follow me"

      Give me a break. Also here is a better link where you can hear the crowd cheering when the cops are removing him. http://video.nbc6.net/player/?id=157250
      • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -7/+23Thanks for the link. In this video you can more clearly see that he won't just leave the ***** place. He got to ask his questions, after that point he is just trying to create a scene. He repeatedly resists being escorted out of a place that he was not permitted to enter.

        Oh and the end is priceless. "They are going to kill me!" Get over yourself. You're not a freedom fighter, you're an egotistical idiot.
        • cube5, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12My thoughts exactly if i heard him correctly as he is walking down the stairs he says that that is his cameraman that he brought along. After watching the nbc video it is obvious he is trying to create a scene. The way he handled that was atrocious, there are much better ways to voice your opinion then that.

          This demonstration by him wasn't about free speech its called not following the rules, he could have easily gone and asked an answerable question and gotten an adequate response.
        • rootishome, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Even though he was quite unruly, the police charging him with "inciting a riot" was a bit wrong I do believe. He did not once say "PEOPLE! YOU NEED TO STAND UP AND FIGHT FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN!" or "COME ON EVERYBODY CAUSE HAVOC!" He was just there to speak his opinion, and although I will agree with his part on resisting arrest, the police actually charging him with inciting a riot is very wrong on their part. With the video taken at the rally there should be plenty of evidence to at least drop that charge.
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Yup, "They're going to give me to the government...They're going to kill me." The guy is delusional.
        • Takkyu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Does that warrant an officer pulling a loaded pistol out and aiming it at him in a public crowd? does it warrant them applying a taser to him for 3-5 seconds straight?
      • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -9/+9I guess it's okay to electrocute a fellow citizen so long as the cops are being cheered on by the mob. You're a ***** slave.
      • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2he was obviously scared, why are you making fun of him? and i don't know about you, but i enjoy my free speech......it's what keeps digg alive
      • raeanin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4THANK YOU. Im glad some people realize this. The guy was being a total ass.
      • DubbedOver, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2___THIS___ is the video everyone needs to see, I am so thankful that there are people who see through this idiot here on digg.
    • fixedcoma, on 10/10/2007, -18/+27They were clapping for his argument that he brought out into the open dumb *****! they weren't clapping that he was leaving!
      • skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Were you watching the same video the rest of us were? Airiox pretty much nailed it.
        • Vschiffy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I disagree, it really looked to me as if the crowd was cheering the guy on. Mmm people get a kick out of people who stand against authority.... However ineffective his stand was.
        • khellendros1984, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4They only started cheering when the police grabbed the guy's arms and started dragging him out. They were cheering that he was being dragged out.
    • FireStarterBob, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2I hope he learned his lesson! lol... free speech has turned into a joke, maybe now he'll recognize that :D
    • STARTSOMETHING, on 10/10/2007, -14/+3I hate republicans. But I think its wrong how collage students run their mouths for their freedom. But throw a gun in that mans hand to serve his country and he will puss out.
      • doodoo112, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3GG grammar.
        GG spelling.
        GG ***** argument that has nothing to do with the video.
      • saigumi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Huh... John Kerru... Republican? No wonder Bush won, you Democrats can't even remember which party your primary candidate was in last election.
    • znachtman, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8So if I say "get off me and I'll leave" while walking out of YOUR house with YOUR television... is that okay? It's obvious from the beginning of the tape that the police there were trying to show restraint. This guy was physically resisting police. By the time he says "stop" and "help me" the camera cannot see what is physically happening. From the views we can see, he is the one physically resisting. At one point, he looked like he was running back towards the microphone.
      • SuperCujo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4He wasn't taking John Kerry's ***** television. What a stupid, stupid argument.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
    • defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11As ***** up as this is, it seemed like the guy was trying to be a martyr in hopes that he could attain the popularity of this guy:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs

      It's like his purpose was to piss off the cops enough for them to taser him because he knew they would.
      • jacobisrael, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0If you don't HANG these cops for trampling all over his constitutional rights, the NEXT step in the process is that we will all be cheering when they bash down your door and taser your children right before your very eyes.
    • skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6He was being an attention whore. If you're too naive to see that then I feel sorry for you. Even Kerry saw this, that's why he didn't step in when the police gave him the boot.

      This has NOTHING to do with free speech. There are a multitude of different ways he could have made his point (much more effectively I might add) without being a drama queen about it.
    • mcm020, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4If this kid wanted to ask a question why didn't he just get a seat like a civilized person. Even after he asked his question he should have remained calm and let the cops escort him out peacefully. Then he might have had a chance in not getting arrested. But this dude had to act like a total ass clown, cocky as ***** too.

      You know if you act like a civilized person with the cops you can get out of a lot of *****. Digg users don't get that because you're all hyped up on this police state, revolution *****. Digg me down you ***** morons.
    • themoosejuice, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3FLORIDA: HE WAS TASERED AFTER THE COPS PUT THE CUFFS ON HIM.
      Close up video:
      http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=657_1190085332

      The police simply need more training. They were not qualified to handle that situation.
      • jacobisrael, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2But it seems that the cops ARE trained--TO IGNORE THIS MAN'S U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

        Thomas Jefferson et. al. would have ORDERED these cops to be hanged from the neck until dead. I would have agreed. Our Constitution is too precious to let thugs destroy it no matter what color of law they operate under.
    • elioty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think the Taser was completely inappropriate, considering how many officers were present. Despite this, I think everyone should just take a look at the other side of the story. Below is a link to the POLICE REPORT of the incident (warning: PDF)

      http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/09/18/offense.report.072274.pdf
  • purpmint008, on 10/10/2007, -129/+237This is completely ***** up.
    That guy did not say anything wrong and those cops deserve half-an-year in jail.
    John Kerry isn't amazing but anything would be better than Bush at this point.
    Also, that thing he said about Clinton was SO TRUE.
    A Republican Majority chose to impeach Clinton over something as insignificant as a blowjob but a Democratic Majority is unwilling to impeach Bush (NEOCON) over his endless list of crimes?
    We need a revolution and a new constitution.
    • AntBing, on 10/10/2007, -41/+139He didn't get impeach for getting a blow job, he got impeached for perjury. They are slightly different.
      • Sublime059, on 10/10/2007, -41/+30Perjury about a Blowjob you moron. Why can't you understand this?
        • santaliqueur, on 10/10/2007, -12/+33Because it's ***** PERJURY, no matter what it was about. He lied, and that's why he was impeached. The subject does not matter.
          • tonycomputerguy, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5They didn't ask him if he got a blow job, they asked him if he had sex with her, and can't you see that there was no F@CKING reason to ask him that in the first place? At least Clinton went and answered their questions, questions that didn't have anything to do with how the president ran the country, and now we have this Neocon ***** war monger in office, killing our troops and Iraqis for reasons that he OBVIOUSLY lied about but somehow that's no where near as bad as an extramarital affair that got no body killed and had no effect on the well being of our nation what-so-ever. Too bad you people are so stuck on the letter of the law instead of the spirit of it, just one of the reasons this damn country is so f@cked up right now.
            As far as this video is concerned there is only one reason for cops to behave this way... They are lazy and improperly trained to the point where they have no concern or feelings about their fellow man. This guy was no threat to anyone and was probably scared half to death with his adrenaline pumping after being hassled so much before he was able to ask his question. The cops were obviously feeling the same levels of aggression and adrenaline and should have known that they were experiencing that rush they all get after chasing someone down. I hope the guy sues and wins, those cops obviously deserve to be demoted and sent back to training at the very least.
          • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3They had to ask him that because there were multiple women coming out and saying they had been molested by President Clinton. As in Clinton using his position to force women to have sex with him. See also: Rape. That is why there was an investigation.
          • zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0"So perjury. But if you commit perjury, I don't care. You have Murder One, Murder Two. There can be a difference in the level of murder. So perjury's the same. Perjury One is saying there was no Holocaust when millions died in it. Perjury Nine is when you said you shagged someone when you didn't."
            - Eddie Izzard

            I think he's got a point.
          • Takkyu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Bush hasn't lied?
        • LucidDr34m3r, on 10/10/2007, -4/+26So perjury is ok depending on the topic? I think impeachment of Clinton was overboard, and they should have never held the hearing, but it was perjury, no questions asked. Why can't you understand that lying under oath is a crime, period. Argue against the law if you want, but not of the enforcement of it. Change the law to read that its perjusy unless the lie is about a blowjob, and then I'd agree that he shouldn't be impeached.
          • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Impeachment is a political process. It does not require a found-guilty criminal offense.

            Impeaching a president for lying about his personal life? Maybe.

            Impeaching him for breaking the constitution on multiple occasions? Definitely.

            Guess which president goes in which category?
        • JC4P, on 10/10/2007, -7/+26Sublime059: If he had not lied while under oath, he would not had been impeached.
        • neuropsychguy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+22Perjury is perjury. There's no reason to resort to name-calling.
        • iTorrey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Perjury is perjury indeed. Clinton broke the law, and under our laws he was subject to impeachment. Bush should also be impeached for violating his oath of office. Forget the lying about the war stuff and all of the other catch phrases, just take the one issue of domestic spying. The 4th amendment is clear and Bush and Co have violated our rights. That is a crime and violates his oath of office to protect and uphold the constitution. He should be impeached for that.

          We can't let partisan politics decide when we impeach our leaders and when we don't. It doesn't matter to me that Clinton lied about something that others claim they had no business asking, if he didn't think it was a justified question then he should have taken the appropriate legal action. He has a law degree and he knew he was lying. He could have taken the 5th or objected to the question formally. He didn't, he chose to lie about it and impede an investigation.

          Whenever our elected leaders break the law they should be removed from office. We can't pull out those tired lines like "The country can't handle going through that right now". We have to hold them to the law or it's useless to even have the law. If we condone their actions through a lack of action then we deserve what we get.
        • XBSHX, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0JC4P: There was no reason for them to ask him about something in his personal life.
        • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3XBSHX : Using your position as the President of the Untied States to molest MULTIPLE women is NOT part of a "personal life."
        • saigumi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1XBSHX - It is when he is the defendant in a sexual harrassment trie.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones
      • ruddy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14that kind of "truthyness" is uncalled for
      • vat0r, on 10/10/2007, -5/+14Perjury is exactly why Bush and Company WON'T ever testify under oath for ANYTHING. The joke's on us and we're either to dumb or ignorant to do anything about it.
    • mykool, on 10/10/2007, -11/+138We do not need a new Constitution, we need an administration who lives up to the oath of protecting the Constitution.
      • todfather, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Well said, It's sad what our great country is coming to. With a puppet monkey in the oval office, there's no ***** way he's smart enough to formulate such a methodical plan. Seriously, he's the best we had?
        • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's what he expects you to believe. But consider this: Why the ***** would intelligent people be bothered with a retarded president? That answers the question of his capabilities... He's doing everything he set out to do. And you KNOW it.
      • skealoha86, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2thank you 1 million times for clarifying...
      • Snarfy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3We need a population that lives up to the ideals of the constitution. It should be expected the administration will do what it's doing. It's the people that are supposed to put the government in its place.
        • kirat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That is so true! Just look athe comments here - whatever the guy did - he may have deserved the first taze, but the second one - for 3-5 s? He was on the floor for heaven's sake! The comments here show why our administrationn isn't living up to its duties - because the ***** people don't give a flying ***** about the constitution and have already submitted themselves to a police state!
      • lawngnomes4pres, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1someone's been watching a few Ron Paul videos on youtube...
    • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -6/+35A new constitution? Okay man, good luck with that.
    • evo8ftw, on 10/10/2007, -20/+8Neocon thats whats laughable hear zip you leftist physco ! Maybe thats why we need Unviersal Healthcare so all you nuts can get your prozac.
      • Mateo288, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5your grammar skills are laughable
      • HomicidalBroom, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3no, america needs universal health care so that families aren't forced into massive amounts of debt if someone in their family gets cancer
        • ddawggin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That was an unnecessary non sequitur to a joke. Lighten up.
    • soulmantim, on 10/10/2007, -11/+2There was more to the impeachment than met the eye.
      It wasn't about the BJ or Purgery. There is something that is undisclosed to the American public about violations against our constitution. Ron Paul makes it clear that people will misinterperete his impeachment as something petty because they threw all the REAL reasons out and made the official reason about purgery. Let's make things right here.
      • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11OK, let's make things right. You can start by giving some evidence other than what "Ron Paul said"
    • silvrpill, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21*****
      we need politicians who FOLLOW the constitution.
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Your train of thought seems a bit unstable.
      • SPARTACVS, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Not entirely stable? Well I'm glad you're here to tell us these things! Chewie, take the professor into the back and plug him into the hyperdrive!
    • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Are you student from the video??
    • GCarden, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Call us back when you've started that revolution, m'kay?
    • JoshuaGross, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I think that the current administration would love a new constitution.
      • horizxon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1We the elite class of rulers over the people of the United States, in order to ***** everybody and make more money for ourselves, do ordain and establish this constitution of the United States.
    • Akronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Interesting that you say that today, because today is constitution day. We don't need a new constitution. We, or at least the politicians, just need to start respecting the one that we already have.
    • Hobbsies, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5A better view: http://digg.com/politics/Student_Tasered_at_Kerry_speech_VIDEO

      If you watch the video, they ask him to step away from the mic, and he refuses. It's one thing to ask difficult questions, it's another to make a scene and resist security trying to get you off the mic. Grow up IMO.
    • nowherekido3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2there is nothing wrong with our constitution. the problem is with career politicians who bend it to their will allowing them to create their ideal police state.
    • nowherekido3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1there is nothing wrong with our constitution. the problem is with career politicians who bend it to their will allowing them to create their ideal police state.
    • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i agree mostly purpmint, except i think that we don't need a new constitution, we just need the one we have to be apheld
    • CPoe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Well heres what pisses me the ***** off, everyone keeps saying we need a revolution and we need to impeach but we never actually DO anything about it...
      I'm about sick of even trying to get people worked up over this because every time it comes down to it people puss out... Im sick of this *****, time to start my own country.
    • phantom20x, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Just so you know, we don't NEED, a revolution, but it WILL happen, and when it does, I don't think anyones gonna be ready for it. My feeling, civil war breaks, and other countries come in and the USA falls apart as one of the great nations thats time is due..
      • NeilJ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Unfortunately the level of comfort is too high in America for people to ever revolt. People are too happy with their ipods and game consoles, to ever care about constitutional rights being lost.
  • JlmAWP, on 10/30/2007, -38/+357Wow, that was way worse than I thought it would be. That's pretty disturbing, to be honest.

    Dugg because....wow.
    • DSGalvin, on 10/10/2007, -8/+15I know right? At one point I almost considered the possibility that this could be acting, but no this is some real *****.
      Whats the news on the cops that tasered him?
      • saigumi, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2"Whats the news on the cops that tasered him?"

        Commendations all-around and free donuts for life, I hope.
    • airiox, on 10/10/2007, -17/+7Word of advice to parents, don't let your children on the internet. They end up wasting peoples time with posts like these.
      • DSGalvin, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Wow, you're 1337 dude...
      • Minkii, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Wtf does that mean? It's call Freedom of speech and this guy did nothing wrong except express his opinion. Good luck shielding your kids from stuff like this, it's life man.
    • isaactwito, on 10/10/2007, -10/+8I feel kind of sick after seeing that. Giving police tasers is a really bad deal. They used to have the options of clubbing someone or shooting them. They had to think before they acted rather than having these "non-lethal" alternatives that they use in the stupidest situations.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
    • da_bradler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3seriously though, those cops are lucky they didn't get stomped, there will be a time when stuff like this is happening and people around quick putting up with it. seriously if that guy was one of my friends and was getting tasered like that I would like to think I would at least tackle the cops off of them.

      cops need to stop getting a free ride look back threw time and see how people will only put up with abuse of authority for so long. One of these days these one of these abusive cops is going to get stomped to death, they need to learn that we by far outnumber them
    • bekind, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0@DSGalvin: "Whats the news on the cops that tasered him?"

      They think he's a little ***** like most of us adults do.

      "The Andrew Meyer arrest was an inside job" that kid demolished himself, the cops were just there to make it interesting.
    • web.phreak, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2***** PIG *****!!!!!
      TOTAL ***** *****!!!!
  • Kewlduderules, on 11/10/2007, -38/+293Oh that is pretty bad. I kinda feel bad for the kid even though he was obnoxious.

    Regardless, one has to question the reckless behavior of the police. The taser was definitely excessive use of force.
    • BabaRamDass, on 10/10/2007, -11/+79Seems like being obnoxious is the only way to pin a politician down and have him answer substantive questions these days. It's sad.
      • PathDaemon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5But he wasn't getting to the point. Saying, "You've been speaking for two hours, let me have two minutes" is not a question. John Kerry had been invited to speak, not this kid. He should not have been tasered, but by making such a commotion he WAS setting himself up for something bad.
      • Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3But Kerry didn't answer the questions (and if you listen to what he was saying while the kid was being attacked by the police, you'd see he's trying to completely change the topic and ignore the situation).
    • jon3k, on 10/10/2007, -19/+12Really? Have you spent much time studying the use of force?

      When will people understand, a tazer hurts for literally 5 minutes and will instantly bring someone into compliance. They could have struggled with him for 20 minutes possibly breaking bones or seriously permanently hurting either him or an officer, or simply pull out the stun gun and press the button.
      • volacide, on 10/10/2007, -9/+15You blind? He wasn't even fighting back, you can see him lifting his hands up in the air to clearly illustrate that he wasn't trying to harm the police officers, he was just trying to get out of their grasp.

        That was some ***** *****.
        • jcounterman, on 10/10/2007, -7/+13He was lifting up his arms and running and struggling and (when on the floor) crawling to get away. Just because he wasn't trying to throw a punch doesn't mean he was going quietly and cooperatively. He was TRYING to make an incident of this, and it looks like he got what he was looking for.
        • triblinator, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5But he didn't stop struggling, and the cops or we have know way of knowing what he would have done if they let go of him - they were trying to restrain him and he was trying to break free. It shouldn't have gotten to that point, but once it was there the cops really had nothing else to do, if he had caused some serious problem in the policemen's absense of force, they would not have been able to argue that 'he aid he wasn't trying to harm anyone'. Its a lot more about the system than it is the individuals.
      • jarjarjanks, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6an officer had already singlehandedly picked him up and carried him out. Why couldnt the 4 other cops carry him out the rest of the way and say get lost? why did they have to taser him while already on the ground and restrained?
        • jcounterman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6He wasn't restrained...he refused to put his hands behind his back for the handcuffs (which would have restrained him) and continued to struggle.
    • faithfreedom, on 10/10/2007, -10/+20Nowadays, police just tazer anything that moves. You know, just for fun.
    • ilovenicotine, on 10/10/2007, -17/+12He was resisting arrest, they couldn't handcuff him so they tazered him...the force was not excessive
      • reubencm, on 10/10/2007, -8/+5did you see how many cops were there? of course they could have handcuffed him, its obviously just more fun to tase him...
      • longhair, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Why was he being arrested in the first place? The police should have NEVER even put their hands on him. Since when is asking a question a reason to arrest someone, and then taser them.. This video makes me sick..
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1He wasn't being arrested in the first place, he was being escorted out. He was arrested after he resisted being escorted out. See how that works?
      • Lunacy182, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3He was definitely out of control. I'm I the only one who saw him running and trying to get away from the cops. If a murderer hand tried to get away from the cops like that then it wouldn't have been excessive force.
        • uncommonwords, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That was the dumbest ***** I've ever read.

          ***** right a murder deserves to be tazed if he is attempting to flee. This student is no murder, though. If he had a previous run-in with the cops is irrelevent. If that is the case, why was he allowed to speak at all. It sure looks to me that he was tazed for being obnoxious. Which was once illegal.
      • omahieu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2In another video posted here, you can see that police actually did handcuff him before.
    • stevelucky, on 10/10/2007, -8/+19@jon3k - i graduated from the police academy and i have studied use of force, and that was definitely an excessive use of force (though it actually depends on that particular departments use of force policies). he even said "let me go and i'll walk out of here". (also @ ilovenicotine) unless he broke the law and was under arrest (and if that's the case, you tell me what law he broke) then they should have just let him go.

      i love the people that side with the cops just because everyone else is behind the little guy. i guess it's better to be unpopular than ignored, right?
      • bigdumbanimal, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1 i hope someday you hesitate at the moment of truth, it might be the last choice you ever get to make.
        you'll have your own digg article with the headline: "dumbass cop fails to restrain criminal, gets shot with own gun"
      • 1of42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0stevelucky: The guy didn't break any laws initially. He was being escorted out of the function for being disruptive. Then he started becoming agitated, physically attacking the officers and making it impossible to restrain him, etc. That is breaking the law. For that he was tasered. If he had just been compliant, instead of trying to act like some kind of ***** martyr, he'd be fine. Simple enough.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I know what you mean by "reckless", but really, it's calculated and par for the course. They are doing what the rulers ask of them.
    • captmorgan555, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Definitely excessive use of force for sure. Taser's are a LESS THAN LETHAL weapon, but are able to kill a person if conditions are right and/or the person has medical problems.
      What if this kid had a heart problem? He could be dead.
      • elfjuice, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Well then the kid should have worn a "Please don't taser me, I'm an A-hole with a heart condition" t-shirt!
    • Bamont, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3No its not. This is where white Liberals who grow up in middle-class homes get to meet the long arm of the law. They told him to calm down and relax, he didn't. They told him to stop making so much noise and follow procedures - and he didn't do that either. Idiots here on Digg think this was a travesty and invasion of his rights. I think his talking points were absolutely stupid (because anyone who has taken a civics class knows that majority popular vote means nothing to the electoral college) - and he brought up the "secret society" that every conspiracy theorist has eluded to about every President since the inception of this country.

      I have sympathy for someone whose rights are violated - but this wasn't the case here. He was told to stop, he was obviously resisting - yet he continued because he's a stupid, white, liberal jackass that obviously doesn't think the law is something he should follow. (This is not just subjective to liberals, most conservatives I've seen are this way too).
      • 1of42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2+ ***** 1. Everyone seems to get all hung up on how he's not some kind of violent criminal, and thus it's automatically unthinkable that he should be even looked at by the police.

        Well, tough *****. He was being disruptive, the police tried to escort him out PEACEFULLY, and he MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE, so he got tasered. Cause and effect. Not that hard to understand.
  • dwelter, on 10/10/2007, -25/+18So did Kerry ever answer?
    • gtluke, on 10/10/2007, -11/+85does he ever answer anything?
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2And that's why this is a dog and pony show and never a real election. You just pray to whatever you pray to for Ron Paul
    • Tremblor1192, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9well if you watch the clip you can hear him trying to answer in the background
  • n0t0kayipr0mis3, on 10/10/2007, -43/+79"Impeach Bush now, what; Clinton was impeached for a blowjob?"
    • dcdevelop, on 10/10/2007, -10/+16Its like our entertainment. Violence is ok but sex isnt.

      Germany tends to be the opposite :P
    • xenofiend, on 10/10/2007, -8/+10dugg for best quote!
      • Pikachelsea, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Wow, yeah, and so original. Never heard that one before.
        • zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Yeah, I've never read sarcasm before either. *****.
    • Error601, on 10/10/2007, -16/+11He's too stupid to remember the impeachment was for lying under oath. Just another dumb kid that gets 100% of his information from blogs.
      • sirbeta, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12Lying under oath, over a blowjob, yes.
        • ZebraCrew, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4qualify it all you want, he broke the law by lying under oath.
        • mrkmrk, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12Qualify *that* all you want, but he shouldn't have been impeached in the first place for something completely unrelated to his office as president.
        • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4Using his power as the President to molest multiple women is certainly related to the office of the President. Clinton is nothing but a womanizer.
          • ninedesign, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Stfu you sensationalist pig. Did you even read that ***** before you posted it?
          • Derekstar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Molest? Really?
  • tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -82/+32Awesome. Good for the police. ***** like that should be tasered.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -26/+11Suck a ***** nazi *****.
      • tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -15/+14Dude, he's fighting them while they try to get him out of there after he abused the system and the methods of questioning. There's no problem here. Just stupid Digg anti-cop ***** propaganda.
        • BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Kerry took his questions didn't he? And this is Digg anti-oppression voicing itself. At my work, the people who read Digg are anywhere from 25 to 65 and of wide ranging opinions and positions. And there IS a problem here...the problem is that you don't see the putting down of dissent not only in this video but in many videos and stories.
        • Lunacy182, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yup, last I checked, resisting arrest even if you think your innocent is still a crime. Resisting arrest period is a crime. Thats what he did. thats what he was tased for.
          • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Tasing is only to prevent harm. He wasn't resisting arrest, because nobody had read him his rights, and he wasn't harming anyone.
          • elfjuice, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1s1mph0ny, the police didn't have to read him his rights before they could tase him. He was disturbing the peace of hundreds of people. He was preventing others from being able to speak with John Kerry. What about that do you NOT understand?
          • elfjuice, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1+1 Lunacy182
  • xbandaidx, on 11/10/2007, -23/+341Someone needs to learn how to hold a camcorder or phone. whatever it was.
    • fweepa, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15agreed. i couldn't see a thing
    • xigxag, on 10/10/2007, -2/+37http://www.starbanner.com/article/20070917/NEWS/70917006/1053/BREAKING_NEWS
      • OilyTheOtter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15That video should be the one on the front page.
      • HibikiRush, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It looks like the girl who couldn 't even keep the camera still for ***** is standing right in front of the person taping this... and of course blocking it from total view. Wow.... If that is her, good job there lady on both accounts
      • bootstrap, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1thank you
    • MageLordy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3yeah...but it is kinda hard to record things. might have been even harder if it was just a camera phone, which it kinda looked like since quality wasn't top notch
    • murty, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3yeah, i was watching without sound. all i could see was him getting carried out then the camera went all ghey there were cops standing over presumably the student.
    • qualish, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I do think he started juggling the camera toward the middle of the recording. : (
    • Minkii, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3You guys should be happy he at least caught it on camera. I'd be too stunned and outraged to even hold one if I was there personally.
    • Wacer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Holy ***** you are stupid. You speak of a fascist state then sit on your ass and claim that you could do better. I hope you think deeper than that. Maybe you should stand there with cops loaded with loads of weapons at their disposal. It's easier said than done.
  • xenofiend, on 10/30/2007, -27/+328I wonder why O.J. Simpson is on CNN right now instead of this story?
    • utryagain, on 10/10/2007, -20/+29I wonder why O.J. Simpson is on any channel when there are Americans dieing in Iraq.
      This kid is a true patriot
      • Castronaut, on 10/10/2007, -9/+20If asking a question incoherently and jumping on a million different tangents is patriotism, then I guess I'm with the terrorists.
      • thexder, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I wonder why there are Americans dying in Iraq myself.
      • Lunacy182, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2This kid isn't a patriot. He is just out of control. Did you see him jumping around and trying to get away from the cops. I do believe thats resisting arrest.
        • squirreljam, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They had no grounds to arrest him on, jackass
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8True and true
    • jon3k, on 10/10/2007, -15/+12Because there's no "story" and ***** like this only shows up on extremely left leaning news sites like digg (mostly because it's full of late teen / early 20 stoners) who think he has some right to be a loud obnoxious ***** at a private venue.

      He got loud and made a scene, so they removed him. He tried to fight them, so they used the force appropriate to subdue him. This ***** happens every day.
      • jarjarjanks, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5the force used was anyhing but appropriate.
      • Lunacy182, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2The guy was resisting arrest. The force was necessary. not every story about some defiant kid should be on the news.
      • LordByr0n, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2They grabbed him and tried to make him leave they never asked him to leave once just grabbed him and when he tells them to get off him thats all of a sudden resisting arrest. Whats more disturbing is that this happened in front of hundreds of people and no one did anything about it. They all just watched as one of their own tried to speak freely and was hauled away for it.
    • wssharp, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5"i'll tell you who the threat to the status quo is in this country, it's us. that's why they show you shows like ***** COPS, so you know that state power will win and we'll bust your house down and we'll ***** bust you anytime we want. that's the message."
    • aldenhg, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Because OJ is black.
    • timjim31, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0oh brother
    • Lionhart, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Because it is CNN. CNN just eats up celebrity news like nobody's business. I pretty much converted to MSNBC after all the Paris Hilton *****.
    • SquigglyP, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4If OJ had been tasered at this speech it would have been news. "news". But this is just some random kid. No one cares.

      I care, but no one cares, you know?
    • PantsTm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2its actually up on CNN's frontpage right now, with a much better video
  • Phr3aker, on 10/10/2007, -15/+62i think im sick now...i got way too dizzy
    • stephant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3It was worth it to see Dane Cook tasered.
  • BurnedKirby, on 10/10/2007, -25/+221I wonder what was worse. This guy getting tasered for nothing, or some of the audience just sitting there watching the show. wtf?
    • pvcrisp, on 10/10/2007, -18/+109The worst part was that the SENATOR didnt do a damn thing to try and stop it
      • asbragg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2i'm sure he didn't want to get tasered either :)
    • exili, on 10/10/2007, -14/+28I agree... No one in the crowd did anything? Complacent on many many levels.
      • biochem, on 10/10/2007, -5/+14what the hell r they expected to do? get in a fight with a cop? they would be thrown in jail FOR SURE if anyone laid a hand on the cops.
        • jarjarjanks, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5not if everyone stood up. the cops were far outnumbered by my count
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You still don't fight the cops, you idiot, you testify against them in a court of law. You know, I've noted quite a few of your comments lately and it appears you have absolutely no common sense.
        • Lunacy182, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3There is no reasoning with the people on digg. If the digg community ruled the world we would live in anarchy.
        • Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I would take anarchy over tyranny any day.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3That isn't true; I saw some laughing.
      • saigumi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That is because the people there wanted to be there to ask some questions and hear some answers. They weren't there to be drama queen idiots.
    • mikkobc, on 10/10/2007, -7/+16I hope i don't come off as insensitive, but I wouldn't mess with a cop with a taser...
      • Gimpishi, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5yeah but a a few cops with tasers vs a crowd of people defending one guys right to free speech.... is different.
      • pedo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2not insensitive, more like fascist pig
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -6/+18What would you have done, BurnedKirby? What would you have had them do? Riot? Gotten physical with police? There was nothing to do but watch.
      • BurnedKirby, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6Riot? There is no use trying to stop violence using violence. But there should be a sort of a rebellion or at least something of the sort of a group of people standing up, walking over to the police, and telling all why this is wrong and what they are doing wrong. But what use is there to stop this madness?

        It is also strange how insensitive these people are. So what if this man is very arrogant? So what if he dislikes John Kerry and or is insulting him and George Bush? Anyone being abused that much should be enough for at least someone to know that no one deserves something like that in those circumstances.

        And what could I have done? I would at least try to gather the people or at least say something! Anything! You all know very well that this is madness to the core. Oh how the police have gone low enough to this..
        • biochem, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7if this is at a school it is private property. i dont agree with what the cops did at all, but if your on private property they dont need any reason to escort you off the premise if they deem you unwelcome. the kid should have just left with them calmly and he would have been fine. plus if u see other videos of what happened this kids is ***** nuts. when they escort him out of the room they try to calm him down outside of it. he insists that the cops are going to give him to the government to be killed. its all on film. http://video.nbc6.net/player/?id=157250
          im sure this isnt the first time the campus police have dealt with this kid. but it still doesnt justify him being tasered
        • BurnedKirby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3True, it may have been on private property and the kid may have had an eventful past, but where are the people when things like this happen? When will America see what is happening on her own shores and take action? (Talking about the people of America, and yes I live in the U.S.) This kid may be wild, but wouldn't you be too if you truly believed that this country was run by such an atrocious person? Wouldn't you be mad too if you saw how careless the officials and most of the population was after being notified of things like this?
        • biochem, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2i agree with you there. im not american but i see what bush is doing and its disgusting. i dont know how to fix it though. hopefully your next president can fix everything hes done.
        • BurnedKirby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes, I hope this all changes for the better soon.

          It appears that digg has glitched your recent comment to the top of the replies (before I have posted) and your other response to the bottom. Weird.
        • jarjarjanks, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2they could have SAID something. Anything. Kerry just keep on blathing his monotonous drivel as if nothing is happening
        • Navicerts, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1no you wouldn't
      • pedo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1"Gotten physical with the police?"

        yes. thats exactly what i would have done.
        • broohaha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You guys sound like Monday morning quarterbacks....
      • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1how about at least shouting a couple of time "Leave the kid alone"
        how about shouting to Kerry, "How the f*** can you let this kid get hurt over no reason?"
        how about actually getting off my seat and try to argue with the cops.

        you dont need violance all the time. there are always words, hardly effectual as they migth be. but the key there will be at least making an attempt.
        • broohaha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You didn't hear people screaming at the cops to stop?
    • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8True. I'd be laughing and pointing at the dumb ***** as he was getting tasered.
      • izallgood, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Hey -- It's not nice to point and laugh --- so you point and I'll laugh. He got himself tasered by being an idiot. I don't feel the least bit sorry for him. If he would have just asked his question like everybody else and sat down he would have been just fine. What makes him special that he gets to take up more time then everybody else.
    • biochem, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5the only thing someone could have done was physically stopped the cops from doing that. and if anyone touched a cop, they would be arrested immediately as well. trevorbelmont is right, what would u have done?
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If people have a problem with a police action they witnessed, they should gather together, lodge a formal protest with the proper authorities, and provide their contact information to the attorney handling the victim's case. Police are not above the law and can face both criminal and civil charges for their actions.
        • Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Unfortunately police are above the law.
      • pedo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1then i guess i would have been arrested immediately. i can live with that. i would have felt pretty ***** guilty if i didn't do anything.
    • Pikachelsea, on 10/10/2007, -6/+19He didn't get tasered for "nothing", he got tasered for refusing to comply with the police's commands after disrupting everything.

      And how easy it is for you to sit in your comfy computer chair and whine about how all those kids should have done "something" (which you have no suggestions of what it could be). Like you would've done anything.
      • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"you" couldn't have. maybe some of us might have. dont club us in this "you" group.

        and yes, i would have at the very least nmot just sat there and laughed over a kid getting tasered.
    • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7What was he supposed to do. This kid is ***** psycho. He was probably scared this moonbat was going to try and kill. This dumbass got EXACTLY what he wanted.
      • banders9, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I relish the thought of you or your kids getting beat down by out of control cops. There'd be Justice. How I despise your kind.
    • skyfire1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Assaulting a police can land you in jail.
      • ninedesign, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah but they call non-aggressive touching assault these days.
      • banders9,