I am troubled by some of the "advice" being given to young students :re dealing with police

[Election]

I've read several posts/threads essentially posing the question why didn't the students fight back against UCLAPD during the now-famous Taser incident. While I believe the right to voice such opinions should be protected, with all due respect, I also believe it's a highly irresponsible position.

The only probable result that comes from picking a fight with the cops is injury, possibly death, prison time, and a criminal record.

I work with a lot of homeless people through church and one of the reasons/excuses (depending on your point of view :)) that they give for being unable to find a job is their criminal record. And while I always encourage them to be extremely proactive in applying for jobs, the fact remains that the unemployment rate for ex-felons is 40%, and 60% of companies say they are unwilling to hire people with criminal records. 50% of homeless people have a criminal record.

So my question for those advocating students to fight with cops, are you willing to hire for them the best defense attorney, to hire for them the best counselor to deal with any potential prison sexual assault, to hire the best physician to deal with any injuries, posibly severe and permanent, they probably will sustain in a fight with peace officers, to support them for the rest of their lives because of the job opportunities they have lost because of a criminal record, and to take the time to reintegrate them into society after they are released from prison to make sure they don't remain in a life of crime?

Unless you are willing to do all of that, you simply are a hypocrite who is so selfish to want a young innocent student to ruin his or her life for your own twisted agenda.

[Little Wing]

1. *claps*

[Mythsaje]

2. It's a no-win situation...

I certainly wouldn't recommend it.

[mike_c]

3. yes, it's much safer for the sheep to bunch up and be fearful...

...than to fight their oppressors. When the police become criminals, WHO do you suggest should stop them, if not the citizenry?

[Alexander]

18. How much cop fighting have you done, keyboard commando?

My guess is, not a lot. What the OP is suggesting is non-violent means of resisting the police when they do bad shit. Physically fighting cops will just lead to more violence, and the establishment will spin it as "assaulting an officer", meaning you'll be less likely to get the average citizen on your side.

Perfectly easy to cast aspersions about what people should do when it's not your ass on the line.

[Warren Stupidity]

31. The OP does not recommend non violent resistance.

At least not that I see. Perhaps he meant to say that, but he didn't. I certainly don't recommend beating up cops gone wild, that is a good way to get shot. However there are lots of good choices in between 'kill the pigs' and 'look the other way'.

And yes, I have put my body on the line numerous times. No it is not easy and you are indeed taking serious risks. It has to be done. It is the only way this bullshit is going to stop.

[Alexander]

55. Yes, there are good choices, and the UCLA kids did exactly that.

I, too, have put myself on the line on a few occasions, but I did so non-violently. And I was aware of the laws and knew not to break them if there wasn't a valid reason to do so.

I was responding to the individual who recommended fighting the cops. Which is a terrible idea, and no way to win people over to your side. Martin Luther King would never have approved.

What the students did - yelling at the cops to stop, asking for badge numbers, protesting the behavior without physically getting involved, and making a video recording of the event - was exactly what I would have done in those circumstances. Particularly since none of them knew the poor guy getting tasered, or why he was being zapped.

Thankfully he's all right, and now there's a video all over the Internet showing the thuggery of the cops in the library. The court of public opinion is likely strongly against the cops at this point, and they are likely to get sued and/or fired for their behavior.

[Fovea]

95. From 1977 to 82

I think I trained the entire Kansas University Medical Center police force in how to immobilize violent patients/offenders in non lethal ways.

And I am here to tell you there is nothing magical about cops. They are generally little better with sticks, etc than the average mugger. But there are always more of them available than there are of you. If there weren't, you'd be facing troops. In in both of those cases, you would be an unarmed (usually) person facing shotguns or automatics.

Now, add the microwave ovens, teargas, etc and it is really stacked against frontal assault. Asymmetrical attacks, on the other hand become easier and more effective the more forces the enemy brings into the theater.

But that is not what happens in a riot, generally. Riots lack the command and control mechanisms needed to fight effectively against odds.

[Downtown Hound]

4. I hear you

Those posts made me roll my eyes. I thought the kids on those videos did everything they could to help that kid. Attacking the police would only have given them an excuse to become even more violent, and it would have seriously damaged those kid's future's.

Also it's easy to talk tough about how you would attack a group of cops armed with tasers from the safety of a computer keyboard. I wonder how many of them would actually have gone through with it if they were there.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. It is only when we all start acting against the abuse of authority

that the abuse of authority will stop. The students in that library should have surrounded and protected the victim of the police assault. They should have forced the police, through militant non violent civil disobedience, to either escalate the situation into a mass arrest, or back off. Yes such action entails serious risk, but in my opinion we are facing a far more serious risk to our selves and our society by allowing the state to act in this way.

[rockymountaindem]

6. Thanks for saying that

All the graduate school applications I have filled out ask if you've ever been convicted of anything other than a minor traffic offense. I'm relieved to be able to answer all those questions with a "no", because I figure that's a big red flag for review committees, if not a fast-track to the circular file. There's no way I'm endangering that so I can get in a fight with a cop I'm sure to lose, and wind up with a record, just so I can stand up for whatever it is we're supposed to be standing up for. I've witnessed others starting fights with cops (because I work the door/security at campus parties sometimes, notably on Haloween), and I can tell you that fighting with cops is not anything I ever care to get involved with.

[Cocoa]

8. a record is a big obstacle to getting a job at a 7-11

the OP makes a great point.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. So a choice between the survival of civil society and your own career

should be answered with 'my career'. It is this ethical viewpoint that has resulted in a steady degradation of our rights and freedoms and a steady and corresponding increase in the power and abuse of power of the state. Until we start to realize that we are the victim of that assault as much as the actual individual being assaulted our slide into tyranny will continue.

[Nostradammit]

13. "Whatever it is we're supposed to be standing up for"

I believe the phrase you're looking for is "civil rights."

[rockymountaindem]

16. So I should step in and be a victim of the system

out of solidarity with somebody I don't know who is already a victim of the system? Awesome. Then we can all live in boxes once we get out of jail. My parents aren't sending me to college so I can get in that situation. I don't have any illusions about this. I saw somebody get hauled out of my campus' Haloween party in handcuffs after a 5 minute fight with one, two and then half a dozen cops. Granted, this person was a drunk asshole who didn't deserve anybody's intervention, but I have no desire to ever be in his situation for any reason. I don't expect anybody would stand up for me if I were ever in a similar situation. Getting myself tasered and tagged with a criminal record (plus I could be deported from the country where I'm attending school) isn't worth it. Nobody can run from their past in the information age, and I'm not going to try.

[Nostradammit]

22. No, you should stand aside and let the cops torture people

Then go get a venti mocha latté.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. eggnog - or peppermint mocha. nt.

[Nostradammit]

28. No foam, please. n/t

[rockymountaindem]

26. No thanks

I'll watch, record if I can, and then tell everybody what I saw. Can't get busted for just telling the truth. Confronting a police officer, armed with a club, a taser and a gun on his/her territory when the law is on their side is a battle you cannot win. I'd rather wait until afterwards, in a court, when the law is on my side.

[Nostradammit]

40. When the law is on their side?

So it's legal for the cops to torture until it winds up in court.

Then it's illegal.

:crazy:

[rockymountaindem]

45. Pretty much

Does the video of the incident give you any reason to believe otherwise?

[Nostradammit]

50. I can't seem to find the words to express my disgust with your viewpoint

I don't know how to reach through all the years of conditioning that have led you to believe that you are not morally obligated to step in and try to physically stop police brutality because it may harm your future career.

Frankly, I don't want to live in your future where police are allowed to torture handcuffed citizens.

[Warren Stupidity]

54. Yeah I've noticied that we have two very different realities

here on DU, most clearly expressed over this incident. I'll bring up that video, as you just did, as to me it clearly illustrates the problem, and the response will be 180 degrees opposite from what I saw. The conditioning is strong and deep.

[Nostradammit]

62. Way too deep.

As a child I could never fathom how the nazis did what they did in Germany, but as an adult I am seeing first hand exactly how it happened. "Don't make waves, the police are doing what they need to do, that guy probably had it coming..." ad nauseum.

[rockymountaindem]

72. I think you misunderstand me

I'm not trying to justify what the police did in any way. What they did, IMHO, was wrong. Very wrong. I hope they lose their jobs and any career in law enforcement they may have hoped for, at the very least.

What I disagree with is your insistance that young people like me should get physically involved, at risk to their entire futures, over such an incident. Even if, say, five people in that crowd (I doubt it would be more), had tried to restrain the police, they would have either been tased themselves, or got the shit beat out of them. I'd be fine, personally, if that were the only risk. But it's not. Because then they would have been slapped with an "assaulting an officer" charge. Those charges raise a lot of ire against defendants and are really looked down upon by most everyone. So, what you're suggesting in reality is that these people throw away their potential college degree, go to prison for years, and come out with no prospects. That really is what you're suggesting. I'm dealing with the reality that most people, and society at large, would not look on anybody who physically attacks an officer favorably under any circumstances.

[Nostradammit]

83. I think you misunderstand me

The risk to your entire future is that you will live in a place where people stand by and allow this kind of thing to happen as it's happening.

I hope that when the police are tasering you to within an inch of your life that there are more people like me around and fewer like you. Most people of moral integrity would fully understand that the people were trying to save your life.

[rockymountaindem]

61. Neither do I

That's why I hope a jury watches the video of that incident and decides to punish those officers, as a warning to others who would do the same thing. But I pity the person who gets put in front of a jury and says "I was justified in hitting that officer". Nobody will ever believe that, unless you miraculously get a jury full of '60s protesters and anarchists. Pretty much every other sector of society wants to stand by the police, as do I (in the vast majority of cases). Say hello to a three year prison sentence (at least) and a record that will ensure you a shitty life afterwards, if you make it out of prison. I like to think I'd be better at making the world a better place in other ways.

[Nostradammit]

77. I think you have more faith in our justice system than I do

[MadHound]

27. Well, I'm happy that the Civil Rights Movement, and the Vietnam antiwar movement

Didn't depend on people with your mindset. Yeah, poor John Lewis, beaten and arrested on the Freedom Rides, his record really haunted him, it was a tough struggle, but he was eventually elected to Congress:eyes:

[rockymountaindem]

41. Civil disobedience

ain't the same as punching a police officer. The first is a noble thing that I think society at least tolerates and often respects. The latter is percieved (rightly) as an egregious violation of social moreys and is treated as such.

[MadHound]

53. Gee, so I suppose you don't consider the anti-war protests in '68, '72 or

Elsewhere "noble" Because believe me, there was fighting and blood in the streets. A lot of it was protesters' blood, but a fair amount belonged to the cops as well. Why did those protesters fight back? Because they saw the cops go on an out of control rampage, beating innocent people, and they felt they had to do everything, including violence, in order to stop the madness. But according to you, that wasn't noble:eyes:

Whatever.

[NEDem]

7. So just bend over and take it

Oh yeah that'll solve a whole lot.

I have a feeling the blacks in South Africa would disagree. Authoritarianism, and support of it is wrong.

Sometimes you gotta take a stand, right or wrong, you have to stand up and not take it anymore.

[Cocoa]

9. when you say "you"

do you include you?

[NEDem]

11. Absolutely

[Igel]

15. The police shouldn't have tasered him.

It was over-the-top behavior and unnecessary thuggery. On the other hand, it simply shouldn't have been a possibility.

When asked by the CSOs to leave, the kid should have left. By not presenting ID--one requirement for using the CLICC lab that late at night was to accept presenting ID when asked--he made himself into a trespasser and rejected the conditions that allowed his presence in Powell Library. He should have been strolling down Royce Quad to the Hilgard bus stop or down Westwood to the Village by the time the UCPD showed.

[Bonobo]

12. I have a reasonable counter question.

Is there any behavior that YOU WOULD NOT tolerate witnessing the police perform on another human?

or to put it another way, would you stand by and watch NO MATTER WHAT a police officer was doing, even if it fit more firmly into your category of what constitutes torture (such as, I don't cutting off a person's nose or something...)

[Crim_n al]

35. The jury here has decided.

If a person is not immediately and completely subservient and compliant, the authorities have a right to do whatever they want to them.

If those library cops had skewers and matches instead of tasers, they would have every right to have made eyeball shasliks, and anyone foolish enough to get in their way would deserve whatever they got.

Never forget that anyone hassled by cops, if not a terrorist already, may be about to morph into one, so any exercise of police authority we see is bound to make us safer.

... if we are very good and smile sweetly while we huddle quietly into complacent corners.

[Bonobo]

43. CAN THE OP RESPOND TO #12 PLEASE.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Election]

47. In general

Not knowing why a police officer is involved in an altercation with a subject, I would probably stand back and dial 911 (I always carry my cell phone) to report this altercation in the potential event that the police department is unaware that one of their officers is in trouble.

This move would ensure that backup would arrive to the scene and it would give a third party the ability to investigate the incident, with me potentially as a witness.

[Bonobo]

57. I'm sorry but that is a non-answer.

[Election]

80. I'm sorry, but that's the best answer to a hypothetical that I can give

And it is exactly what I would do in such a hypothetical scenario.

[Bonobo]

81. I didn't give a hypothetical. I asked you to give one.

I asked you if there was any situation where you feel that immediate intervention would be warranted/justified from a moral point of view irrespective of the "risk" issue.

[Election]

86. It's a hypothetical namely because

I am asked to assume that the police are violating the civil rights of the subject simply on mere sight. In reality, aside from a sexual assault, there is no way for me to ascertain why the police are involved in an altercation with a subject.

This leaves me to assume one of two things, which both lead to the same result:

1. The policeman/woman has justified cause to engage in an altercation with the subject. In this scenario, I would want backup to arrive to protect the police officer.

2. The policeman/woman is wrongly assaulting the subject. In this scenario, I would also want backup to arrive to bring the fight to a close and to invesigate what really happened, with me as an impartial witness.

Even if the police officer is in the wrong, I know that I as an unarmed civilian stand no reasonable chance to protect the subject against an armed police officer.

In short, my reaction is motivated by classic game theory. :)

[Crim_n al]

63. You'd dial up even more police?

Yep, they would make a great "3rd party" to investigate the other police.
We all know how unbiased the cops are when assessing a dispute between fellow cops and anyone else.

I'm just glad you weren't there with a stun gun of your own.
At least, I'm assuming you weren't.

:puke:

[Warren Stupidity]

66. And if that don't work SWAT TEAM TIME

and then AIRSTRIKE!

We must obey authority.

[Crim_n al]

85. One would think so. There are big bad laws now and we need jobs

so we must not make a fuss, must never think for ourselves or display courage; those traits are apparently outdated.

"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph" : Haile Selassie

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy: that is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." : John Kenneth Galbraith

The worst sin toward our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them: that's the essence of inhumanity: George Bernard Shaw

So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men: Voltaire. François Marie Arouet (1694-1778)

[blondeatlast]

14. Cooperate when it happens and if they overstep their bounds, make

a public stink and/or SUE. I did the latter and I got a nice out of court settlement (of which I can't discuss any more than that).

I will say that I have no criminal record and that the Tempe cops take being told by Fire Dept. personnel that a person should go to the ER far more seriously than they did at the time.

[MadHound]

17. LOL, how pathetic

"Be afraid, don't interfere when the state is acting immorally and illegally! After all, there's a *job* at stake here!" Sorry, but as one has put my ass on the line for political purposes(and yes, it was subsequently put in jail), you are full of it. Geez, how this country has declined from forty years ago. Injustice like this would have been met with student resistance, whereas now people are afraid to act on injustice occurring before them, all because they wish to protect their future employment opportunities:eyes:

Oh, and just for your information, I did my time(ten days), paid my fine($1000), and went on my way. It has never, ever negatively impacted my employment prospects. In fact let me get directly to the real kicker of my story. The reason I was arrested was for protesting against a local nuclear power plant being built, back in the early eighties. I got popped for trespass and resisting arrest. Twenty years later, and there I am, working at a nuclear facility, a research reactor, producing cancer treatments. And yes, they did indeed do a background check, and my past didn't rattle them a bit.

The vast majority of employers give a fair amount of leeway for political arrests. Otherwise how would that politically active part of the boomers actually be employed.

But nooooo, we must advise these college students to be sheep:eyes: It is that sort of lack of accountability that has contributed to this country becoming the police state that it has.

[Downtown Hound]

23. I hate to break it to you

But getting arrested for protesting is a far cry from assaulting a police officer. I've been arrested for protesting as well, and it really is no big deal. But attacking the cops is. So many people seem to be upset that the the surrounding students in that room didn't rush those cops. Give them a break. They weren't sheep. They spoke out loudly. They yelled. They screamed. They demanded the cops information. They filmed the assault. That is not being sheep. Just cause they didn't attack and give voice to all of our rage doesn't mean they sat there and took it. They didn't.

[MadHound]

37. Hate to break it to you,

But resisting arrest is a Class D felony in this state, and it is permanently on my record. I tell potential employers the truth of what I was doing, and the vast majority of employers have understood.

There is a huge difference in getting arrested for political/moral reasons and being an ordinary crook. Employers tend to be much more forgiving of the former, and many of them even have such records themselves.

I frankly find it disgusting that there are people out there advocating that people sit down, shut up, and take it, all out of consideration for their future careers. There are some times and some issues where you have to put many things on the line, including your life. And advocating that people should be sheeple out of career considerations is part of what got us to this point in the first place. If people had been seriously advocating about police brutality twenty years ago, hey, maybe this wouldn't have happened.

[Downtown Hound]

51. Who the fuck is advocating sitting down and taking it?

Basically what we're saying is give those kids a fucking break. They did stand up. But a bunch of people here seem to think that they should have grabbed billy clubs and beat the shit out of the police. That's a bunch of fucking self-righteous bullshit. They did what they could, and I thought they handled it well.

And I'll say it again. What you did is not the same as what people are saying those kids should have done to those cops. I applaud your efforts, but leave those kids alone. Enough bullshit bravado.

[MadHound]

58. Sorry, but there comes a time when you have to take a stand

And when you have an innocent human being, possibly being killed in front of you, action is required. Stand the fuck up and be counted.
Yes, these kids yelled, and shouted and filmed. And the tasering continued apace. Would your reaction be different if the kid had died? Would your reaction be different if this was your kid getting fried?

And hey, at least I've enough morals to put my ass on the line when it counts. Unlike some, who are *gasp* worried about their future careers.

[Downtown Hound]

70. You're not the only one who's ever put your ass on the line

It's just that not all of us flaunt it and act like it makes us the supreme bad ass where we can sit back and judge everbody else that doesn't respond exactly to our satisfaction.

[Cocoa]

60. your employers are different from mine

I can't relate to "Employers tend to be much more forgiving of political arrests, and many of them even have such records themselves."

In fact, I am pretty sure my last employer would have preferred I be a murderer than a political activist.

[MadHound]

67. Granted, I don't know the specific attitudes of each and every employer

However judging the prevalent attitude in the hyper conservative nuclear industry, in a red state, and seeing the examples of the tens of thousands of '50s, '60s, '70s and '80s radicals who have gone on to have gainful, fulfilling careers of their choice, I will have to stick by my assertion:shrug:

[SlavesandBulldozers]

98. I agree

i didnt see a lot of sheep in that video.

[Cocoa]

30. I don't believe your assertion

"the vast majority of employers give a fair amount of leeway for political arrests."

That sounds like something that almost certainly can't be true.

[MadHound]

44. How many tens of thousands of people were arrested on either political or moral

Grounds during the civil rights movement? Many, many tens of thousands, yet how many of those people went on to have fine, fulfilling careers, where their political/moral arrest record didn't make a difference? As I said, I was an anti-nuke protestor, and was arrested and convicted for such, a felony no less. Yet it had no impact on my future work in a research reactor. That story has been repeated many, many times.

Yes, most employers can differentiate between a politcial arrest and your ordinary criminal, and most will take that into account.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. For example may day 1971.

"On Monday, May 3rd, 1971 one of the most disruptive actions of the Vietnam War era occurred in Washington, DC, when thousands of anti-war activists tried to shut down the Federal government in protest of the Vietnam War. The threat caused by the May Day Protests, forced the Nixon Administration to create a virtual state of siege in the Nation’s Capital. Thousands of Federal and National Guard troops, along with local police, suppressed the disorder and by the time it was over several days later, over 10,000 would be arrested. It would be the largest mass arrest in U.S. history."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_May_Day_Protests

I guess we all should have stayed home.

[Cocoa]

65. straw man

no one said people shouldn't protest.

[MadHound]

69. No, but the OP *is* saying that the students should stand by and not interfere

When an obvious moraly, and possibly deadly, wrong is being committed before them. Sorry, but there are times when one has to stand up and take action, in spite of what it might do to your future career.

[Warren Stupidity]

87. The OP appears to have edited up his OP.

It seems to have more of the fight the cops in it than it used to. I actually don't think that a lot of us here were or are advocating that the students in the library ought to have gone straight to physical assault on a police officer. If the OP's point (now) is that the UCLA students should not have started kicking the shit out of the campus police, Well I agree, that would have been stupid. They should have interceded with their own bodies to prevent the ongoing assault against the victim of police brutality.

[Warren Stupidity]

84. Oh there was plenty of violence on that day.

[madmusic]

19. So the "tough on crime" movement can claim total victory.

I agree with you 100%. Dissent is dead. Long live the puppets.

Seriously, I agree they should not have intervened since it was not a life/death situation.

[MadHound]

21. Actually, being tasered repeatedly can easily be a matter of life or death

Never mind the whole injustice of the matter, this student could very well have been dead, and frankly the students standing around could be considered criminally, or at least morally, negligent.

[Cocoa]

38. I question that assertion as well

I can't imagine the possibility of the students being criminally negligent if the student had died. Any precedents for that?

[MadHound]

48. Criminally negligent, perhaps not. But morally negligent, certainly

How would you feel if you had watched as a person was unjustly tasered to death in front of you? When you, along with others, had the power to prevent such a death? I know it would haunt me for the rest of my life, and yes, I would be considering myself morally deficient for such a lack of action. But hey, that's just the way I am:shrug;

[madmusic]

68. That's not what I mean. Sorry it wasn't clear.

I meant to say the due to the severe laws today and the severe stigma of a criminal record, it would not be worth it to the students to intervene unless it was an obvious life and death situation. Then they could claim some justification.

How many of Nixon's "tough on crime" policies were really meant to silence dissent? Well, here we are.

[madmusic]

82. For example:

As a result of these provisions, the Three Strikes law significantly increases the length of time some repeat offenders spend in state prison. For example, consider a defendant who has prior convictions for assault on a police officer and burglary of a residence, both considered serious or violent crimes. Subsequently, he is convicted for receiving stolen property, a nonserious and nonviolent felony. Before the enactment of Three Strikes, he would typically have served two years for the property offense. Under the Three Strikes law, he would be sentenced to life in prison. Figure 2 illustrates how sentencing under the Three Strikes law differs from the prior law under different scenarios of current and prior offenses.

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2005/3_Strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm

The 3rd offense could be for drug possession. Though it might seem a stretch to think a student would have a burglary conviction, that burglary could be for a petty theft if the person entered with the intent to steal, for example in the college book store or the local liquor store when he didn't have any money on him.

So the student didn't have the bucks for all his books, goes into the book store and steals one (stupid, dumb, wrong, of course) and gets a burglary conviction. Maybe probation and restitution. Now he intervenes and gets an assault on a police office, 2nd strike, double the time. He gets out of prison and is busted for possession of drugs -- bye-bye, student, 25 to life.

That's a pretty good silencer.

[T Town Jake]

20. A voice of reason and sanity on this topic midst the Che wannabes.

:thumbsup:

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Ghandi, not Che.

And if you have a problem with Ghandi and Mr. King, please do elaborate.

[T Town Jake]

32. Ah, here we go with the straw men, right out of the chute...

...I didn't say Ghandi and King, now did I? I said Che. Che was a violent revolutionary; Ghandi and King practiced non-violent resistance. Are we seeing the difference? Is the acute differential between the actions of the former and the latter two occurring to you, upon further reflection?

Glad we could get that cleared up.

[Warren Stupidity]

42. You said we are all che wannabes. Your strawman.

I saw your strawman and raised you two of my own.

Glad we could get that all cleared up.

So do you have a problem with non violent passive resistance? WOuld that not have been the appropriate response of the citizens in the library?

[T Town Jake]

78. And wrong again (quelle surprise): to be a strawman the analogy must be false...

...and my analogy isn't. Quod Erat Demonstrandum. See how that works?

Now, I believe we're done here.

[Warren Stupidity]

90. I bow to your superior intellect.

You've used the full latin for QED therefore you must be right.

Your analogy is false. Hardly anyone is advocating violent revolution and armed rebellion as an appropriate response to the UCLA incident, at least not that I've seen. Perhaps you don't quite know who Che was or what exactly he advocated? We are advocating that the people in that library ought to have taken direct action to intercede and prevent the attack on one of their own. Ghandi, not Che.

But you said QED so therefore you win, eh?

You can always not respond or go to ignore, but you my friend are wrong, not I.

[Cocoa]

56. Gandhi demanded that people attack police officers?

I hadn't heard about that.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. No he suggested militant non violent resistance.

Which is what I have advocated as well as many others here regarding this incident. You might get arrested, beaten, and jailed though, and according to the OP that would be a bad thing so you shouldn't do it.

Sheep ======> slaughter.

[Cocoa]

71. the OP is talking about fighting police officers

I just re-read it. It's specifically about advice to FIGHT the police officers.

If you're talking about someone who is advocating the students do nothing, you're not talking about what the OP is.

[Warren Stupidity]

91. The original post has been edited.

It was not that specific to start with, at least that is not my recollection.

[Webster Green]

29. Had I been present, they would have had to take me too..

I've had enough!

It's time to fight back...in congress...in the streets...in the fucking libraries....whatever!

[hedgehog]

33. Someone in another thread mentioned the Berkley Cop Watch

If you really think that the police are out of control in your area, then the time to act is before a confrontation is under way. I tend to agree that the students did everything they could. Campus police in some states are armed law officers, not rent-a-cops. Interfering with an out-of-control arrest such as is shown on the tape could have gotten someone shot. The best answer is not a one-on-one confrontation but community wide organization.

Now the question is, are you willing to take the time to do something effective?

[Alexander]

34. I agree, and applaud your post.

The mentality of some of the DUers I've seen is much the same as the pro-war crowd three years ago. In other words, you should put your ass on the line, with unknown and possibly terrible consequences, but as for me, I'll sit back behind my keyboard, where it's safe, so I can tell you what to do.

A question I pose to all DUers: In all the cases you've ever seen of a random person getting arrested/tasered/subdued/hit/whatever by cops, did you actually know the full story of what was going on? Note, I said random. From the sounds of it, nobody in the UCLA library knew the unfortunate guy getting tasered.

That being said, I think the students who were there did exactly the right thing - tell the thuggish cops to stop, ask for badge numbers, and make a (preferably video) record of the event. Many of these thug types will use any excuse to start cracking heads and indiscriminately arresting/beating people, because they were "assaulted". Better to catch them being thugs and throw it back in their faces after the fact than to give them any excuse they can use to sway John Q. Public over to their side.

Does Chicago 1968 ring a bell? Guess what, fellas. The public was on the side of the cops. Yes, they were brutal, yes they kicked the shit out of innocent people, and yes it got way out of hand. But if you play he said/she said with a regular citizen and a person with authority, 9 times out of 10 people are going to believe the authority figure.

[Warren Stupidity]

36. Selma Alabama. nt.

[Alexander]

75. And?

I can't tell what you think of the students' behavior, so I'll ask you directly - did they do enough to resist? Not enough? Too much? What?

BTW, King was non-violent, just like the students.

[Cocoa]

76. Selma, AL represents people ACTING

it represents people BEING courageous.

Not to be confused with telling other people to be courageous.

[blondeatlast]

49. I give the students enormous credit; it's hard to know exactly what to do

in a situation like that, but their actions were wise and proactive. Asking for badge numbers, filming it on the cell phone; what more do we ask of them?

Had they escalated the situation there is no telling what would have happened.

I have no sympathy for overstepping police (see upthread for details) but do have respect for the good ones. In this instance, these were clearly not good cops and the situation could have gotten out of hand very badly and quickly.

[gulfcoastliberal]

39. Everyone should get the "Busted" video from Flex Your Rights

It's extremely well done and describes exactly how to deal with confrontational cops. I'd recommend it for anyone.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/

[951-Riverside]

59. Thank You Election. n/t

[Cocoa]

73. I have a theory

consider the fact that a few students did take such courageous actions as asking the officers for their badge numbers, etc., but that most did not.

I have a theory about the difference between these two groups of students. I would say that the tougher one talks, the more one exhorts others to be courageous, the more likely they are to be in the second group, the larger group that did nothing.

[yowzayowzayowza]

74. So, should protestors be prepared to be tasered these daze?

No more draggen 'em to the paddy wagon!!! Naw, we'll jus zap 'em til they get with the program! Yea, thatz the ticket.

[NEDem]

79. yep and when you're zapped, shut up and take it.

Baahhhh, Baaahhh

:eyes: :crazy:

[Warren Stupidity]

88. It has already been done on numerous occasions. nt.

[yowzayowzayowza]

99. Tasered while Cuffed? n/t

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

89. Okay, I think I posted one of the first....

And, I've been in jail, and I've been homeless, and I was inches away from moving to Canada in '71 because my draft number was 12.

I live and lived in Alabama then and now.

I saw a cop pull a tow chain out of the trunk of his car during a student protest about integration and walk into a crowd of peacefully protesting students.

I went to jail with a broken nose. He went home with the knees of his pants scuffed. He was later fired.


So, to quote Rosanne Barr from Comic Relief last night as some didn't care for her straight on rhetoric: Blow me.


There were other incidences. I was a a redneck activist. I believed in the things I was taught about America. I believed in Ghandi and Martin. I was a pacifist, but I was also of the belief that if you can stop someone from harming another without doing bodily harm to anyone that it might be a good thing to do.

[Nikki Stone1]

92. Practically speaking, FILMING the attack was far more damaging to the cops than rushing them

What would have happened if the students had physically responded and rushed the cops? Bloodshed perhaps, criminal records for certain, and sympathy of many to the police who "have such a hard job" with these "young spoiled kids with attitude".

INSTEAD, you got a film showing the cops for the pigs they are. How great is that?!

You don't need a physical altercation if you've got a cell phone and YouTube.

[bob4460]

93. Well in a state like Kentucky where if you are a felon.....

You never get your rights back that is cruel and unusual punishment.It is especially hard on poor and minorities

[uppityperson]

94. Wide range of responses to this incident, for next time what to do

Which posts ask why didn't students fight back? "Why Did The UCLA Students Stand By?" is a big one I see. Edited to add, now I see the "storming cops" ones. Most of what I have read does NOT say attack police, but is asking about what happened and discussing how to better help next time.

There is a wide range of responses possible to incidents. Ignore it, keep head down in books. Gather around and watch. Gather around, watch, video. Verbally protest. Call police headquarters saying police out of control. Get between police tasering and taseree/ surround taseree. Physically restrain police. Attack police.

People with criminal records have a harder time finding a job, but sometimes you have to stand up for the greater good. There were plenty of people during civil rights protests and VietNam protests who stood up and said "hell no" and got arrested and got beaten and made a difference. I am not advocating being violent towards police, but there are other options and if enough people are brave enough to stand up it works.

If you now want to say I have a twisted agenda because I do not support police brutality, so be it.

[pinto]

96. More campus involvement, from staff and students alike, in oversight of recruitment, training,

policies and procedures of campus police would seem a good, additional response here as well. It could only benefit the whole UCLA community in the long run.

Most major city PD's have oversight systems, some better than others, depending on the legal mandate for oversight, the local political leadership involved and the willingness of the community to remain a player in civilian control of law enforcement.

It takes that consistent political, legal and public involvement to make them effective.

[Cleita]

100. The university has ombudsmen to settle disputes among

staff, faculty and students. They are somone to complain to, but mostly they just listen and take notes. It's going to be up to the Administrator in charge of the campus police to launch an investigation and subsequent firing and maybe charges made against the police involved. I'm sure it's already in the process of being done.

[Jcrowley]

97. Questions

Do you "just continue filming" as the cops taser the student the 6th time? The 11th time? The 43rd time? Do you ever intervene or do you still just stand there?

What if the student was your brother?

“The first question which the priest and the Levite asked was: ‘If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?’ But ... the good Samaritan reversed the question: ‘If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?’” Martin Luther King, Jr.

Personally i was not offering advice to anyone and I'm the one who started the thread. Please go back and look into it and point me to one post where I offered advice to students or anyone.

Unfortunately many of the posts (most) isolated on the individualized rather than examining the entirety of our culture, the context, and it's conditioned behavior which was my point.

As I asked in that thread to another, and was ignored, how far do you let it go? How many times does the person get tazed before you intervene? What if it goes on and on? What if it's your sister?

These questions aren't even meant to draw specific answers but to deepen the discussion. And what is left ignored is how do we respond to the infinite everyday violences in our society and why is there such passivity.

How far have we let it go? And why?