Whitewash!

I have seen the video and think that this report is just another whitewash:

[1] The student was already interrupted after a few seconds! He wasan’t finished with his first question!

[2] The officers were already standing behind him, when he started talking! Why?

[3] The microphone was shut up when the student ask the question: Do you belong to the same secret association as the president? Maybe that should be mentioned here and not Mr Clinton’s conduct, which was only compared to in the question before.

Now somebody is coming up with the rumour that the student provoked the tasing himself and wanted it? How sick can people be in the US! The entire incidence shows that I was right to leave your country after 21 years!Wolfgang

Wolfgang Hartmann, Dr., at 7:15 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Taser U

Considering the fact that Tasers are now the solution dejour for handling people who use their outside voice indoors, it would behoove these pinheaded syncophants to show a little more respect to those who possess them. It is possible, of course, that Mr. Meyer asked for it, just as short-skirted girls “ask for it,” or people who show their billfolds on a dark streetcorner “ask for it,” or any other target of “victim blame” deserves what they get. It is possible that a recreant audience needed the diversion, as witness their jovial chuckling, grinning and laughing as Mr. Meyer lay roasted and cringing on the floor beneath the protectors of mankind. It is possible that the sitting Senator of the U.S., combat veteran leader of men, was unable to get his voice heard above the din of the cops demanding unquestioning obedience from Mr. Meyer’s prostrate body. As the courtroom aficianados are wont to say: anything is possible. But, these young twits had best learn a hard lesson now, not later at a greater price. When McCain called his tormenter a little jerk, it had no lasting effect. The ante had to be raised. John Kerry’s tormentor was Tased. If that doesn’t shut down the brats, what will be the next level of “time out?” History is replete with attempts to shut down students who raise embarassing questions, aka tear gas, bullets, billyclubs, knucks, bullwhips, dogs and even tanks. And still these boneheads won’t shut up. They just keep asking for it! When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn? So much for higher ed at Taser U.

deuce bollards, at 7:35 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Since when is it okay for a person (even if he is a student who may have been making a worthwhile point) to resist- to aggressively resist — campus security and law officials?

It was his shouting and attempts to physically fight back that exacerbated a situation already made tense by his inappropriateness during the Q&A session.

He continually fought back and showed belligerence for minutes after the officials were asking him to calm down. He showed no respect for the other gusts at that event and no respect for the officials.

Why are we so quick to defend him?

Michael Madison, at 8:20 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Taser Boy

Note the man in the suit who gave the old finger across the throat sign to the cops as soon as “Skull & Bones” was mentioned. It is THIS mere mention of the name that was the cause and the immunity (for the cops) for the whole ordeal. Let’s be real here this really is not about if the cops acted correctly rather that they were given orders by someone who should not have been giving them at all and it was a violent offense against our first ammendment but what else is new? Kerry was the perfect plant to run against Bush. He did what the Reeps wanted; that was to split the memebers of the parties in half then made sure he would fail. His campaign was handled in such a manner that even Taser Boy realized it and was outraged as all Americans should be over W’s false presidency. But NO ONE is talking about that for they are so easily lead astray.

og oggilby, at 8:25 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Tased Student

I do think a lot of people are missing the point. Yes, the student probably set this up to a degree but all he did wrong was ask questions of a public political figure. People these days don’t want that to happen because the answers might rock the boat or better yet the vote. Our country is turning more and more into a police state. Free speech is deemed unAmerican! Since when? The line of demarcation between our laws and the people of this country have been sliding ever so slightly over the years to the point where the sheeple have come to accept almost anything that is done to them in the name of national security. Don’t believe it then take a look at the latest TSA/DHS rule that is to be implemented in February. THEY must approve of your travel plans if you travel aboard a plane, ship or bus if you travel internationally or DOMESTICALLY. People’s attitudes towards their own freedoms have shifted away from freedom so that they can be protected. IT’S LIKE DESTROYING THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SAVE IT! Wake up people, this is the harbinger of more crowd conrol to follow.

“ID Card", demanded the tall man in the black uniform who was walking by and then decided to query the people standing in a line for coffee as he ran their ID’s though his datalinked scanner. One was pulled aside already and waited sheepishly for his fate to be decided. He would likely disappear with a black hood around his head and plastic cuffs holding his hands behind his back. Probably another internet blogger that thoughtlessly said something against the “Great and All-Powerful Decider".

JGalt, at 8:45 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Law enforcement is required to step in when a law needs to be enforced; what law did the student break? Being unpleasant? Being rude? Talking too long? Saying the word “blow job?” The so-called charges he faces are all based on actions he alledgedly took AFTER the police placed hands on him (resisting arrest, felony use of violence, etc).

Four cops could certainly restrain and remove one unarmed skinny college kid assuming that was even necessary. The use of the Taser was most certainly punative.

Peter, at 9:00 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Free Speech???

Besides the other issue being downplayed, I feel the real issue is the one of free speech. I see it everywhere lately. We are no longer a free country, yet Bush spouts his speeches about America fighting for freedom. What freedom? Used to be if you stood up for something, or yourself, it wasn’t a police issue. I, myself, have been escorted out of government buildings, when all I am asking for is to be given my rights in that building. I see people in real life, not on television, in regular confrontations being told the police will be called if they call a nasty store clerk a bitch. Too bad. If the clerk is giving the customer a hard time, then the clerk is a bitch and the customer has a right to say it without being arrested. The student should not even have been arrested, never mind tasered. And what about Kerry? The liar! How can he say he didn’t know? He was right there.

Every time someone says something someone doesn’t like, police are called in. This is no longer a free country.

Nanette Rayman, Writer, at 9:10 am EDT on September 20, 2007

police proximity

i’m not defending the police or their actions, but would like to point out that they were right there in close proximity to the student because he had barged into the auditorium and already been disruptive before even attempting to ask his question. they were therefore on the lookout for him — he had been told he could ask his question and leave, since we wasn’t there in the audience waiting in line to ask his question legitimately anyway. that said, of course the police overreacted, even if the student was out of line. what continues to amaze me is that this has become world-wide news... there’s a lot more going on in florida that’s worthy of national coverage — such as our essential disenfranchisement thanks to the fact that our now-earlier primaries are not going to be accepted or recognized by our own democratic executive committee. THAT’S the issue we should all be talking about, do we want our votes to count this time or not?

uf prof, professor at UF, at 9:35 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Taser Incident

I believe that in every society there are individuals who ruthlessly crave power and control and are able to convince or train a certain number of weaker-willed citizens to go along with their schemes. They are like bacteria that lurk in our bodies until some insult gives them the opportunity they need. For our bodies, a wound, for society, perhaps a terrorist attack or losing a war. If we think we are intrinsically better than the Germans after WWI, we are kidding ourselves. The police officers hovering around the speaker probably fall into the category of the misled. As a very saddened alum of that institution I hope the U of F will find the leader.

If the incident was set up, I would call it a civil disobedience sting operation that succeeded rather well.

Grocheio, Asst VP Planning and Institutional Effectiveness at Shorter College, at 9:45 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Self promotion

This young man is aspiring to be another Michael Moore. The whole episode smells with self promotion at the expense of the truth and common sense. Maybe he will get an award for distortion just like Moore or atleast become as infamous for it.

Kerry, at 10:00 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Michael Madison, Are you saying that shouting (without causing physical harm to anyone) requires tasing? Also, can you explain what “showed beligence” means? Likewise, does a failure to “show respect” require and electric shock. It is unclear what law was broken, and so far he hasn’t been convicted of anything. (Resting arrest and “disturbing the peace” charges, in most jurisdictions are usually dismissed, but the technicalities of these things usually bore people. If anyone wants to get into it, I can.)Even if he was hogging the microphone, it is still unclear what law he broke. But, on the other hand, maybe students will start calling the police when they are sick of someone asking irrelevant questions in classes.

I have not come to a conclusion on whether the actions of the officers was correct (or even reasonable for purposes of qualified immunity), but it seems that many people are under the impression that it is legal to shock people for merely being rude. This simply is not the case. I really can’t find a good tape of the incident that I want to watch about 20 or 30 times.

Larry, at 10:15 am EDT on September 20, 2007

if your not all deaf while he is rambling on with his information for the people before he starts asking his questions he is told by a women to ask his question and he argues with her briefly, typically a person is given about 15-30 seconds to ask 1 question and sit down in a situation like that he was exceeding his boundries with what he did when he rambled on, it wasnt covering up his freedom of speech its that they want as many questions as possible to be answered and kerry goes on to answer them but thats not in the video but it is noted on most sites that have done a report on it. if he had simply said hi senator kerry i have 3 questions for you and asked them calmly and not in an argumentative fashion he would have gotten to ask his questions and sit down, and then his obvious ove reaction to the campus police just trying to get him off the mic so others could go, which its obvious thats all they wanted to do at first but once his obviously fake over acting to the officers actions they went to detain him its normal for a suspect to be tasered once if they are resisting arest IE not allowing the officer to put the cuffs on and not cooperating by puting hands behind head/back what have you and lying on your stomach. would be nice if everyone wasnt such liberal douches on things like this.

Josh M, BLIND = ALL OF YOU, at 10:35 am EDT on September 20, 2007

How could it happen?

When I got the news from google news and finished watching it, I just could not believe my own eyes. I was thinking that how could it happen Florida, a land of freedom. Maybe Meyer talked too. That’s true. But he was by no means, from the start to the end, a mindless guy and he knew a lot about what was happening in US and if he was about to put forward questions when his microphone was cut off, a means of freedom was taken away. How could it happen in US?

Mark Chen, at 10:50 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Larry

From what I have heard, the security officers (not police) were called on after “Taser boy” refused to leave the microphone. Only after attempting to peacefully remove him did they try to escort him out. Finally, the taser was used as he was fighting the Campus security, which could be seen as threatening the safety of those in close proximity.

Aaccolade, at 11:00 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Please ... Please ... Let’s Be Civil!!!

“It is my thesis that the agent of this clinch is administration and the administrative mentality among teachers and even the students. It is the genius of administration to enforce a false harmony in situations that should be rife with conflict.

Historically, the communities of scholars have perennially been invaded by administration from the outside, by Visitors of king, bishop, despotic majority, or whatever is the power in society that wants to quarantine the virulence of youth, the dialog of persons, the push of inquiry, the accusing testimony of scholarship.

But today Administration and the administrative mentality are entrenched in the community of scholars itself; they fragment it and paralyze it. Therefore we see the paradox that, with so many centers of possible intellectual criticism and intellectual initiative, there is so much inane conformity, and the universities are little models of the Organized System itself.”

Paul Goodman in “The Community of Scholars”

Frizbane Manley, at 11:10 am EDT on September 20, 2007

Response To Aaccolade

I certainly can’t answer for Larry, but I would like to elaborate on how I read his input.

First, either this young man was abusing the informal procedures for participation or he was not. If he was not, then shame on everyone who participated in his removal from the room. If he was, however (see A Prof’s post), then he should have been “removed” ... either by reasoning with him or, if that was ineffective, by physical force.

Second, let’s assume reasoning wouldn’t work and the security “police” had to use force. There were more than a few of them there, they could have had him on the floor, face down, in less than five seconds and had his hands behind his back and cuffed him (see MJNighan’ post). Then, since there were so many security “police” there, they could have carried him out, face down. Outside the lecture hall they could have interrogated him, determined the extent to which he was a threat to others, and either booked him or sent him on his way.

Using a taser in a situation like that merely demonstrates the incompetence of the officers. Yes, I agree their incompetence may well have been completely a function of bad training ... training on how to deal with a disturbance in a lecture or discussion environment like that one (and they are ubiquitous on university campuses), or training on the appropriate and effective use of tasers. Agreed, they may have been well-trained and were rouge security officers (although I’m voting for bad training).

If you like, turn this episode into an infringement of this young man’s First Amendment rights ... or his rudeness ... or his being a treat to others around him. Good grief, we saw more than a few individuals like him at the Senate hearings last week when David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker were testifying ... and there was no basis for an outcry regarding how they were treated. What is truly absurd about this situation is the use of the taser.

Now I’ll let Larry speak for himself.

Frizbane Manley, at 12:00 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

A clarification: these were not “rent-a-cops” or “security officers.” These were full police officers.

A Prof, at 12:00 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Get a clue, people

The tazered yahoo is just another of the unruly, rude, ignorant mass of contemporary college students who thumbs his nose at courtesy and common sense.

He violated several rules of etiquette of public discourse [cut in line, ranted a speech instead of asking a question, became belligerent when politely told to allow the speaker to answer, etc].

THIS IS NOT A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE. The boob was allowed to speak! He just wouldn’t shut up and allow others to do so. And then he pitched a fit like a 5-year-old...and now everyone in mommy-and-daddy-ing him.

Poor little Boo-boo brought it on himself. If an authority figure has to ask you 5 times to please stop disrupting a public event, and then you decide to openly resist police from escorting you out, you deserve to be tazered!

this is lunacy, at 1:00 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Florida law on disturbing the peace

Mr. Manley and others,

I think we are just losing site of the underlying issues:1) Was a crime being committed (probably not);

Being rude and obnoxious in a place that you are lawfully present is not a crime. In Florida, the relevant statute for disorderly conduct is 877.03 ( http://tinyurl.com/3a5ulp ). The Florida Supreme Court has held that this section is limited only to words that world, themselves cause an “immeidate” breach of the peace because they would cause harm to others. Or, in the words of a court of appeal, a couple weeks ago: We construe the statute so that no words except “fighting words” or words like shouts of “fire” in a crowded theatre fall within its proscription, in order to avoid the constitutional problem of overbreadth, and “the danger that a citizen will be punished as a criminal for exercising his right of free speech.” Spears v. State, supra, 337 So.2d [977, 980 (Fla.1976) ]. With these two exceptions, Section 877.03 should not be read to proscribe the use of language in any fashion whatsoever.Smith v. State, 2007 WL 2481658 (Fla.App. 2 Dist.,2007) see http://www.2dca.org/opinion/September%2005,%202007/2D06-1347.pdf

In Even over-speaking isn’t a crime as far as I can tell from looking through the Florida statutes. Therefore, it is questionable whether his arrest was even lawful in the first place.

2) Was his constitutional rights violated (probably);

This will require an inquiry into whether he was injured and whether his arrest was really lawfull.

3) Would the officers be entitled to qualified immunity (not sure from videos);

While people are routinely arrested for “disturbing the peace” most of those charges are dismissed, because in most states (that I am familiar with) there usually needs to be a civilian complaint made. Likewise “resisting arrest” charges are often dismissed simply because of the problem of proving “lawful” arrests. Some police departments have a policy of charging anyone that is injured with resisting arrest, which results in very high dismissal rates. On the other hand, some say it results in a more healthy respect for officers of the law (some of whom lack college degrees). It is also unclear as to what the officers perceived at the time.

Larry, at 2:05 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Taser ths!

Of all our rights provided in the in the first 10 Constitutional Amendments known as the Bill of Rights, the most sacred is free speech and in particular — political speech!

There are NO rules of etiquette that override or abort the right of a citizen to express a political opinion. NONE!

Historically, the courts have been clear on this issue. When this young man sues and I advise him to do so, we will learn from the outcome how much of a police state the imperial presidency evolved.

Jack Jones, at 2:10 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Its funny how sometimes the same people who say you can’t trust the government with anything are often the ones who are most opposed to asking politicians and public officials the really tough questions. If everyone was asking tough questions, I might have less sympathy for the one person who had the courage to do so. I have no reason to disbelieve those who say Kerry has answered these questions before. But once again Kerry’s answers have been lost in the shuffle and have been overshadowed by a distraction.

Jerry, at 2:10 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

response to jack

Actually, free speech is not unlimited. A popular example: You cannot yell fire in a crowded theater. It poses a danger to the people in the theater that overrides your right to say whatever you want. Even political speech is not protected carte blanche. Example: If you wear a jacket with “fuck the draft” written on the back into a courtroom/courthouse it is within your free speech rights to do so (can’t remember the name of the actual case). However, if you go into a courtroom/courthouse and yell “fuck the draft” you would be escorted (physically if need be) from the court room because your “political statement” interfered with the process at hand; you may even be charged with contempt. The point is that as important as free speech is it is not so protected that you can say whatever you want at any time you want. Etiquette or protocol in many situations dictates the manner in which you are allowed to express yourself. Another example is the classroom. In college I was a political science major and when we had discussions there was a Q&A structure and if I had refused to abide by the structure of the class discussion I would have been asked to leave. And you can bet that if I refused to leave they would have called campus police.

jwdunnivant, at 3:45 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Mr. Jones, Let’s take a step back.

First of all, the speaker was Senator Kerry. Kerry, if I recall correctly, ran quite a serious campaign to unseat the current president. Are you really going to tell me that this tasering was part of some elaborate campaign to pacify the populace? Was Kerry in on it? Was he bait? Was his comments that he wanted to answer the question a ruse?

Secondly, when people get unconstitutionally beat up by the cops, they can sue under 42 USC 1983. The only big legal questions are the scop of “qualified immunity” wherein the individual cops can assert that they had an objectively reasonable belief that their actions were not going to violate a constitutional right. I really can’t opine on the merits of this because a lot of things would need to be put in context.

Here is my suggestion to you all: Why don’t you ask yourself how you can make debate freer and more interesting? I would argue that in the past ten years, the state of discourse in the United States has improved. Anyone can start a blog. Anyone can post and host source materials. There are virtually no costs to express oneself in writing or even on video now! Any government action is immediately scrutinized and commented on by anyone, and once something is written, anyone can, inturn comment on that. Search engines crawl blog and further disseminate thoughts to the masses.

If there really was oppression, there wouldn’t be a viral video of this arrest and tasering.

Larry, at 3:45 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

yelling “fire” can be legal and constitutionally protected

I am sort of amazed at how many people here seem sympathetic to the idea of suppressing this guy’s ideas. I guess I should address a few of their premises.

jwdunnivant, It is perfectly legal to yell “fire” in a crowded theatre, if there is a fire. However, because threatres are dark, and people won’t be able to ascertain for themselves whether there is a fire or not, there is a “clear and present” danger of causing some harm that won’t be avoided by people thinking for themselves.

The “contempt of court” hypothetical might be out of place, since the power to hold people in contempt is actually an inherent power of a court that is separate and apart from a prohibition on speech-restricting legislation.

Mr. “Raoul Ohio” guess what? Schools, politics, and just about everything are dominated by a**holes. For example, many political speeches are nothing more than slogans. Some of them reduce centuries of jurisprudence to a few quick platitudes. To me, that is disgusting and should not be allowed. But, it is. Whether he was behaving obnoxiously was a matter of perspective. Whatever the case, even Sen. Kerry seemed to agree that the question (I forgot what it was) was fair game, so, at a minimum, it has some claim to legitimacy.

Mr. Olson, Likely Sen. Kerry WANTED an open dialogue with the students. People like Kerry thrive on open dialogue. Why? Either they like it for its own sake, or a good part of being a politician is being an attention whore. Also, politicians tend to like oral presentations because they lend themselves to snappy responses than to heavily-footnoted and sourced intellectual arguments. So, a school that limits dialogue to written comments probably will be sorely disappointed. But, it would be nice to see lawyer-politicians respond in the form of appellate arguments to questions. But, I know that isn’t going to happen any time soon.

Larry, at 5:50 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

The F word is good for America

Geoff, I am approaching 40, and I have seen people approached 100s (perhaps thousands) of times, and most of the time they do not use the “F” word. However, it is their right, and if we restrict the use of the “F” word, we will be restricting use of the “w” word (i.e. “Is the War in Iraq bad) or the “E” word (“Who should win the next election.”) So, my “F”riend, the “F” word is but a small price to pay for a free society, and we must protect it.

Larry, at 7:15 pm EDT on September 20, 2007

Explanation To Larry

Sometimes I think with my support and $5, one could purchase an over-priced, remarkably small, high calorie cup of “coffee” at Starbucks.

Sorry, Larry, but I was trying to be on your side. In my “It’s All About Relativity” post I was trying to say (1) check out another example of incompetent police using a taser and (2) the University of Florida’s use of the taser was in an equivalence class with the use of a taser on the poor guy at UCLA who could not – or would not – produce a library card.

In my “Please ... Please ... Let’s Be Civil” post I was merely trying to point out that more than a few academic environments are structured in a manner that places vociferous students on the defensive. Let Congress be the home of a form of civility that is as phony as a three-dollar bill. Attempting to assure civility in an academic environment is an invitation to, as Goodman put it, “quarantine the virulence of youth, the dialog of persons, the push of inquiry, the accusing testimony of scholarship.”

In my “Response to Accolade” I was trying to say this guy was either a threat to those around him or he was not. If he was not, shame on everyone involved. If he was, it would have been trivial for competent police to constrain him ... and without using a taser. More than that, however, the use of a taser in this instance is indicative of police incompetence.

So, Larry, although I disagree with you from time to time, I am inclined to agree with all of your posts in this instance.

Frizbane Manley, at 1:10 am EDT on September 21, 2007

The University Police Department

A few words from a(n August 2007) UF alumna and a Gainesville resident:

The University of Florida Police Department is a “State and Nationally Accredited law enforcement agency,” according to their website. While I don’t think that they should have tased Andrew Meyer, I do object to people implying that they are not a real police force.

UPD, as it is called here, is generally a tolerant and civilized organization with an excellent record of community outreach. I think that what happened at the Kerry forum was the result of pressure from Kerry’s people and others on the officers and UPD in general to make sure that nothing untoward happened. Poor decisions were made, and that’s that.

Elizabeth, at 12:00 pm EDT on September 21, 2007

I do not think that Andrew Meyer’s civil liberties were trampled. He was given an opportunity to speak, even though the specified number of questions was up, and he started braying like a madman. He had already had a confrontation with the police earlier in the meeting. If you have access to facebook, here is an account from somebody who was actually at the speech:

http://ufl.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4835364043&ref=nf

If somebody was behaving as he was in the middle of a shopping mall, or even a classroom, there would be little question about his removal. I think undue force was used, but I do not think that the officers should be fired, or that all of this “freedom of speech” talk should come into the discussion. The main issue for me is that the rules regarding taser use are not clear and that they need to be reviewed, a process that is underway at UF as I write this.

Elizabeth, at 2:40 pm EDT on September 21, 2007

Wow SAD

Wow americans can be very very selfish and racist at times, i remember like a couple months ago a UCLA student that was an iranian was asked to leave the library but resisted and got tazed by the police so then they put the video on Youtube and like 85% of the comments were saying that he deserved it and shouldt have resisted and stuff like that, but now that it happen to an american its a totally different story you say oh no they should have let them talk. And also i wanted to say Freedom of Speech my butt !!! they didnt even let the kid talk!! wow

Kaveh Sassanian, You didnt care before!, at 11:55 pm EDT on September 21, 2007

The police went overboard in tasering Andrew Meyer, and Dubya still owes Al Gore an election. The 2000 election. Other than that, no comment.

whatever, at 12:00 am EDT on September 22, 2007

Meyer/UF

Meyer is 21 yrs old. Just recently he was legally allowed to clubs, alcohol, etc. This is a highly competitive country, where we fight for oportunities and leadership. Supressing our kids with any guns is controling by fear, which I see as servitude. Supressing crime is fine, but not blossoning leaders like Meyer.

Carl, at 8:55 am EDT on September 22, 2007

Let Meyer Speak

Mr. Meyer was making some valid points before he was interupted and I think his questions should have been listened to and answered. Asking him to stop speaking was the first thing that went wrong and Sen. Kerry should have asked the police to stop what they were doing to Mr. Meyer and recognized his legitimate questions and taken the time to discuss a couple issues and then politely ask Mr. Meyer to let the next person ask their questions. This would have been impressive but instead appeared supressive and Sen. Kerry and Company again look like the donkey on their political banner.

James, at 8:55 am EDT on September 22, 2007

civil action against the police officers

As a Law Enforcement officer I find that I am ordered to do certain things I find not so pallatable. There are laws I ABSOLUTELY do not agree with. But, i do my ob with all my heart and souls because i am expected to. Even when i find it distasteful. this kid resisted arrest wih violence. Whether or not I agrred with his speech. Whether or not i think he should have been allowed to finsh. ( I do believe he should have been allowed to speak his mind in the time allotted. Regardless of any speech he used.) When he stopped being civil is when he was removed from the discussion. Instead of contacting the ACLU and filing suit against the university or whomever he feels slieghted him, He chose to fight. He CHOSE to resist the officer with violence.All things being equal and watching the incident many times, I still believe that I cannot fault the officers there making a decision in 1 second or less and we get to pick it apart and armchair police the whole thing. I am all for flying the flags of discontent. there are many civil ways to do that. He chose not to. Did i see other ways to gain compliance from him? Yes, I did. But, i wasn’t there and I can’t attest to how the officers were going to handle the crowd if they were to erupt in more violent outbursts. Let the courts decide. Let Mr. Meyer file suit and take his civil case before of judge.

rhino6170, at 11:20 am EDT on September 24, 2007

Wanting to see more even more considered comments

ALmost all of the comments are immediate and I think this is the first new one in days.

On a whim I just googled the slogan I saw in large form bannered at the march. I then surfed here from a column that linked me to kerry blog himself, his aids list of links.

That on the right column here many postings for security openings scroll by as I page down is why this is the first place I’m commenting after not doing so at the Gore channel that doesn’t actually stream the video of the prior student tasing that made it to DN but instead seemingly uses it as a tease to get a provider in the visitor’s area to carry the channel.

I had wondered how on earth a web server farm even could handle Gore’s mention of the current.com- the answer is the real site is a.tv and the com only has a few words on it by the time I made it there at least.

For me next time I’m invited to a campus I’ll negotiate the use of force. It’s VERY important to note that the arrested was a student. THe fact that he was admitted tothe school, and I think still in good standing, and that the appearance WAS FOR SUCH PEOPLE hasn’t been sufficiently emphasized. Perhaps cameras have to be banned as a deterrent.

I"ve also not seen enough emphasis of the level of force used to shove the guy like a football training sled across the back of the auditorium. THe notiton that they weaponised him by maybe only putting one cuff on cuts deeply. It made me wonder ifthat’s why nylon is the norm for protestors beyond the expense and weight of real ones.

Kerry was not trying to leave. Merely waiting in line, or being first, is not enough to have the unassailable merit of forfeiting the ability to be heard. THis student had the power to be heard. He was arguably risking expulsion in the pursuit. His choice to so do this was denied him.

FOr me this is the lesson of the very young girls who got sat on by big sheriffs wielding swabs of cotton laced with the oil of hot peppers now nearly decades ago. THere right to meaningfully resist was compromised by the use of opportunistic torture.

Again we are talking about college students who have not been watching football after drinking and who are not of the same sort to be prone to violence after having done that either. THis fact can’t be ignored and I think it is.

There was an assumption of risk. BY the speaker, by those in attendance, that was a consequence of the choice to matriculate with such peers. It was not a girls college, not a catholic place, not a hyperelite nor to my knowledge associate degree granting mill.

I’m a fan of occasional Prime Ministers Questions. THe microphone that should of been muted was Kerry’s. Even the cops could of done a better job by controlling the room instead of oblivously jumping the person. His peers could of silenced him or at least had the chance to go on record for disciplinary proceedings.

It should mean something to visit a college campus where children of the elite or just fools dare fearlessly engage. He was not a ornery defendent already outfitted with a shock belt- as we have seen seated for many years almost routinely in capital cases.

He was TOO old to be so tempered by even ‘dry’ use of involuntary coercion. THe student and all students considering schools should be properly advised of what this means. WHen applying enquire what the rules of engagement will be. Are faculty merely tenured or is the responsiblity of adult enquiry rewarded with the power to speak until whatever due process admission earns can undo the status? Kerry was the guest. To meet him and not be so controlled is for me the entire point of leaving the home to attend a PLACE of higher education. Civility is the wrong word. THe cops intervened where they had no place. THe job is not one properly bestowed upon alumni. Here the necessity of evil never invited them into action- only a shameless grant of power by us to mill corporate and forget all real purpose still all but unchecked afflicted. Verbal wrestling, interrupting, shouting, name calling- this is what people do. TO battle so is to be honored. Ivory towers should have this in common with Vegas- what occurs there is for internal consumption- for not the minds of men in blue to think they have even a clue about. It was not Kerry’s fault to not have controlled. The students there should not merely march- they should consider finding a place of greater educational oppurunity to transfer to en block or they might very well be happier in some real cell and are more likely to suffer it’s constraints upon graduation even if they think they consent to it.

Agony is a deterrent to enquiry. That some institutions deny there cops the tools of it’s easy imposition is encouraging. Kerry could now say from now on he will only visit them.

karl, at 4:25 am EDT on September 25, 2007