UCLA student get tazed... WTF????

[Charlie]

He was obviously not a serious threat.

How do you figure? A young, 18-24 middle eastern male acting erratic in a public location, refusing to produce identification, and refusing to leave against the rules employed in that library. He fits enough of the qualifications of a "threat" right there. Are you telling me that a public college library is any different than a crowded public cafe, a police checkpoint, or a public city bus? Seems like erratic 18-24 year old middle eastern males seem to pull "stunts" at those locations as well.

I think the cops were completely justified. Their actions were not of profiling, but of probable cause. It's 2006. If the dumbass had left when he was initially asked to, as was required by the rules of that campus library, none of this would have happened. Instead, he chose the route he did, and suffered the consequences.

-Charlie

[trent]

It's 2006.

Hell, its almost 2007. Lets trade those stun guns in for real guns! I think cops should carry .50 cals.

[trent]

Okay, now think of this.
In terms of "Terrorist value addition" the person who commits the terrorist act is not that important. They have a full vertical integrated chain of researching, planning and oversight, right?, so what happens if they outsource the last step of the "ladder" to an anglosaxon, for instance?

Like in a corporation, it would cost them a bit more in terms of money, but, if striving for efficacy, it'd be worth it. Case point, if you target "muslim/arabs/terrorists/whatever stereotype" in airports then the terrorists will just find a someone who won't be targeted.

To understand why knee jerk reactionist style ideology won't work while trying to deal with terrorism you have to understand the deep passionate roots from where is stands. The movie Munich does a good example of explaining this to the average joe.

I understand your point, however, Catholic and Christian religions, two of the most populus in the US, do not teach that death is ok, as long as you blow up yourself and as many as you can around you.

You post:

it would cost them a bit more in terms of money

, but what is this money going too, the guys who are going to blow themselves up? That doesn't make sense, they know they will not recieve the money. that is a bullshit movie argument. Think stronger than that.

The problem here is the fucked up teachings, only in that community can you teach 14-18 year old kids blow themselves up to "kill americans." What a fucking crock. So you support these muslims teaching their children that the way to afterlife is to blow up Americans? Get a fucking clue. Americans are smart enough as they won't blow themselves up for some bullshit religion. Get a clue, we are smarter than that. We are not a culture of idiots. While we have different view points, the amount of Americans (white or not) who would blow themselves up for some terrorist, middle east asshole religion is slim.

[Charlie]

terrorist, middle east asshole religion

Speaking of, here's a good video on Islam, sit down and grab a drink, it's about 45 minutes long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PWIK8YTZS8

-Charlie

[Julien]

I understand your point, however, Catholic and Christian religions, two of the most populus in the US, do not teach that death is ok, as long as you blow up yourself and as many as you can around you.

You post: , but what is this money going too, the guys who are going to blow themselves up? That doesn't make sense, they know they will not recieve the money. that is a bullshit movie argument. Think stronger than that.

The problem here is the fucked up teachings, only in that community can you teach 14-18 year old kids blow themselves up to "kill americans." What a fucking crock. So you support these muslims teaching their children that the way to afterlife is to blow up Americans? Get a fucking clue. Americans are smart enough as they won't blow themselves up for some bullshit religion. Get a clue, we are smarter than that. We are not a culture of idiots. While we have different view points, the amount of Americans (white or not) who would blow themselves up for some terrorist, middle east asshole religion is slim.

If americans where so smart, they wouldn't have started a "war on terror."
Anyways...

Although I think i see your point somewhere in there, I think you are mistaken about the

Americans are smart enough as they won't blow themselves up for some bullshit religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)

Everyone can be influenced to do very very dumb things. Look at the Klu Klux Klan movement in america.

the amount of Americans (white or not) who would blow themselves up for some terrorist, middle east asshole religion is slim

It only takes one.

Julien

[trent]

If americans where so smart, they wouldn't have started a "war on terror."
Anyways...

Don't see a problem with the "war on terror."

Although I think i see your point somewhere in there, I think you are mistaken about the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)

Everyone can be influenced to do very very dumb things. Look at the Klu Klux Klan movement in america.

That doesn't mean they would blow themselves up for some bullshit middle east religion. Try again.

It only takes one.

That one is much less found an anglosaxon than a middle easter muslim.

[e30tom]

You sir are an arrogant prick... And that is all I have to say about that.

That's the first accurate statement you've made in this thread. But, it's better than being a hindsight driven, monday morning quaterback....always willing to place blame but never willing to take responsibility.

[Julien]

Don't see a problem with the "war on terror."



That doesn't mean they would blow themselves up for some bullshit middle east religion. Try again.



That one is much less found an anglosaxon than a middle easter muslim.

Regarding the war on terror, there is a simple reason it doesn't work. I, of course do have many personal reasons why I don't beleive it works, but again, let's keep it simple.

War on terror defined:

"a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation" on "violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion"

That just doesn't even work conceputally, how in the world do they expect to work in reality.

And this is why racial profiling in airports isn't a good idea (leaving out morals...)

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=239727

Anyways, if you any real arguments that have been thought through, i'll gladly discuss them with you. Nice e30, by the way.


Julien

[joshh]

Thanks for your comment, even though you know we didn't see the beginning yet need to judge. Fuck you.

We're all judging here dumbshit. Blow me.

[joshh]

Don't see a problem with the "war on terror."



That doesn't mean they would blow themselves up for some bullshit middle east religion. Try again.



That one is much less found an anglosaxon than a middle easter muslim.

This obviously shows how much you know about middle eastern religion. These people blowing themselves up are not the Islam equivalent of Christians. The guys blowing themselves up are extremeists. Just like the KKK say the are Christians. Get the point. "In the name of Islam".
If the KKK said "in the name of Chistianity"...would that mean all Christians are that way...

[533i]

I hate for my first posts to be in such a touchy thread... but here's what I think anyway.


An unidentified young male who is resisting the officers requests to leave or produce identification and is trying to incite those around him to action against the officers... Non-lethal weapons like the tazer are made for situations just like these. It's unclear to the officers if he is a real threat or just another college student who thinks he knows best and has all the answers to the world's problems. Some action must be taken to remove him, since as far as the officer's know, he doesn't belong and could harm another student. This doesn't even have to do with terrorism, although that is a possibility. It has to do with theft, rape, random violence, or any other crime that a person could commit.

From what you can hear in the video (as it's very hard to actually see anything), he continually ignores the officers' demands to stand, and you can actually see them draging him on a couple occasions, so you can't say they didn't try to help him stand/move. They even warned him that he would be tazed again if he didn't comply, so you also can't say he wasn't aware of the consequences.

What would you have done? He was resisting, they couldn't "just cuff him and carry him out." That could have quickly led to a violent situation, a struggle between the officers and the student, and a greater probability of others getting involved.

As for the personal attacks on each other, those don't make you seem smart, or cool, or convince anyone of your side of the arguement. Nobody but you cares how well you flamed the other guy. Can't we just discuss the situation?

[e30 gangsta]

I gave birth to the most confrontaional thread on r3v ever. :0 j.k.

[Vedubin01]

Im with 533i on this one!

[trent]

As for the personal attacks on each other, those don't make you seem smart, or cool, or convince anyone of your side of the arguement. Nobody but you cares how well you flamed the other guy. Can't we just discuss the situation?

Yea, but I was drunk the entire time.

[e30sd]

even though i can't stand trent or charlie, they are right. lawfully, the officers are within their rights.

people get tased, beanbagged, "maximum enforced" every day. i hear calls like this one all the time. it just so happens that someone had a camera. it's only a big deal if there is b-roll. then it's a story. and the university as well as campus pd will get crucified unless they do something before the public eye.

sucks but it's true.