Is this a violation of your civil rights as an American?
Were the police within their rights to use 50,000 volts on an American citizen who did not possess a firearm or a weapon?
Does this activity sound familiar with Ohio State during the 60's?
Does this violate our civil rights as American citizens and restrict free speech in our country?
Would this have happened if there was a Democrat in the White House?
Does this activity fall in line with the far right and Bush lovers in this country?
Has Kerry commented on this activity..I haven't heard his response?
Is this now acceptable behavior to electrocute someone because we disagree with someone?
Does anyone feel like we live in George Orwell's ,"1984" society?
Does that you proud as an American that we can taze someone because we didn't like what someone has to say?
What would our founding fathers if they were alive have to say about the police action against this young man in Florida?
2007-09-20 02:06:12 · 15 answers · asked by Dfirefox 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Is there a police state mentality in this country much like China since Bush has been in power?
2007-09-20 02:21:18 · update #1
Personally I am ashamed as an American that this has happened and it is embarrasing that people in other countries will view the U.S.A. in a bad light and not see this country as a "free" land where you can express yourself freely.Whatever happened to ,"I may not agree with what you have to say,but I will lay my life on the line to defend your right to say it ".
That is what I was taught by teachers when I went to school,obviously that viewpoint has changed.
So I suppose that if we do not like an artist or a painter,we should taze them also and publicly ridicule them.
2007-09-20 02:28:44 · update #2
To me..it was a disgrace to that particular police department when they cannot handle a person, who is clearly upset because he cannot speak his mind AT AN OPEN MIC session. They should NOT have tassered him.. that was just wrong and yes I do believe in violation of his rights..
It does remind me as well of the 60's demonstrations and the head smashing w/ the batons.. shameful that our law enforcement STILL cannot handle one person peacefully.
2007-09-20 02:14:56 · answer #1 · answered by Pqasdy 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Q: Is this a violation of your civil rights as an American? A; Mine no, Andrew Meyer's yes.
Q:Were the police within their rights to use 50,000 volts on an American citizen who did not possess a firearm or a weapon? A: No he was leaving the hall and either already cuffed or about to get cuffed.
Q: Does this activity sound familiar with Ohio State during the 60's? A: No, he was roughed up but he wasn't killed. At Kent State Students were throeing rocks at the National Guard.
Q: Does this violate our civil rights as American citizens and restrict free speech in our country? A: Not sure, honestly. Senator Kerry may have had "Secret Service Protection", The event organizers had an agenda. It seems the Police overeacted to a smart alec kid and had some communication problems. Truthfully if you disagree with the police it must be resolved in court.
Q: Would this have happened if there was a Democrat in the White House? A: Yes
Q: Does this activity fall in line with the far right and Bush lovers in this country? A: Not really, my mom is 80 a true Democrat but she has a disdain for smart alecs. My mom and dad grew up in an era when all healthy American Men served in the military. When my dad was 21 he was a WWII veteran, married and had a kid.
Q:Has Kerry commented on this activity..I haven't heard his response? A: He did say in 37 years of public appearances he has never seen anything like it.
Q: Is this now acceptable behavior to electrocute someone because we disagree with someone? A: Absolutely Not
Q: Does anyone feel like we live in George Orwell's ,"1984" society? A: No because in "George Orwell's , 1984 society" the little guy would be made an example out of and broken so he'd never think a bad thought of "Big Brother". Many people are repulsed by the behavior of they police and sympathetic to the torturous treatment of Andrew Meyer. Once Andrew clears some legal hurdels he may be on a few talk shows. That never happened in "1984".
Q: Does that you proud as an American that we can taze someone because we didn't like what someone has to say? A: No
Q: What would our founding fathers if they were alive have to say about the police action against this young man in Florida? A: I know they would be happy the Nation they founded is still in existance. One thing they didn't have the evening news ot TV than. I believe the founding fathers would realize we decendants of the freedom they won must struggle to realize a more perfect union.
Q: Do you think at a public event like this the rules should be clearly stated and agreed so we may never have a repeat performance ?
2007-09-20 04:26:33 · answer #2 · answered by Will 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Personally I do not think the use of a tazer was necessary and agree to that extent. John Kerry ( a Democrat) was right there as it happened and did nothing so I find it hard to believe a democratic president sitting in the white house would have changed it. The police department involved was the campus police and not the national guard and no one was killed so I see no real comparison to Ohio state. It could be a violation of civil rights but not free speech. The man had been asked to leave and became beligerent so they tried to forcibly remove him, it had nothing to do with liking what he had to say. Police departments frequently abuse powers and can be faulted under the leadership of both Democratic and Republican administrations. Kerry has commented on it and said he has never had a discussion end that way in all his speaking career and he did not know a tazer was used and that he hoped that neither the student or the police were injured. The Campus stated that this young man had caused disturbances at similar events and when the police started to remove him many in the audience applauded. Much is yet to be discovered in this matter regarding the police procedures for use of a tazer, the pre discussion rules laid out by the campus, Exactly what the individual officer saw that made him decide to use the weapon and so on. I do not see how anyone can blame Kerry for this, nor can I see how anyone could blame Bush. It is a campus police/student confrontation.
2007-09-20 02:39:46 · answer #3 · answered by Robert P 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
ask yourself if this guy was stupid or just ignorant? if he would have just sttod at the mike when the police came he would have just , in all likelyhood , been escorted from the building and that would have been the end of the story. he choose to resist and in doing so got more punishment than was nessissary. the police didn't know what or if this person could or would do to the senator. i am not a kerry fan but he is a senator and was being protected.
the down side to this event is the probable law suite that will follow and agin the police will get a black eye for their efforts.
2007-09-21 05:26:46 · answer #4 · answered by mr doodles 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This would have happened no matter who the speaker was or who was in the white house. It actually happens every day, I'd even say probably a thousand times a day, but it doesn't always get caught on film and delivered to the media.
There was no violation of the students civil rights or of his rights to free speech. The officers allowed the student to finish his questions and his rant. They then asked him to step out of the hall, this is when the student became belligerent.
The officers warned the student that they would use the taser if he continued to not cooperate.
2007-09-20 02:19:01 · answer #5 · answered by labken1817 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
About time he should have respected the police in the first place
NO
Alive and well the reason why this jerk got tazed was he refuse follow police instruction.
He also gave a camera to a friend to tape it and 'to watch this'
He cry like a baby when the cameras were on him but once they were off he told the police they did nothing wrong.
I see by your your questions you got suckered into his scam.
2007-09-20 05:02:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A very small percentage, after the much larger number that was outraged at first learned that it was a publicity stunt and the guy, later in an interview, agreed that he deserved to be tazed.
2016-05-19 01:34:53 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it's funny, and the grandstanding pipsqueak got what he deserved.
It was not a violation of his rights - he had no right to attempt to disrupt or take control of that function. And he had no right to resist the officers who were removing him.
I'd rather have seen him beaten with billy clubs, but that's not done anymore. Pity.
No, the Kent State thing was a tragic incident that started when the students broke the law.
The activity is not about right-wing or left-wing, but about preventing lawlessness and incivility from publicity-whore grandstanders.
Nobody is advocating violence because of simple disagreement - that's just stupid. This incident wasn't about a simple difference of opinion.
No, this isn't "1984".
Again, it was not about what he had to say, but that he had no right to disrupt the function.
You seem to be operating under the mistaken belief that having a right to free speech means that you have a right to speak freely without limit in any venue, at any function you choose. And that's not so.
2007-09-20 02:22:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
He decided to fight with police officers instead of leaving the premises as instructed to do so. The idiot wanted to make a scene and force the police to act and he succeeded. Now he should be locked up for resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer.
Free speech does not give you unlimited rights to disturb the peace and assault others.
2007-09-20 03:32:42 · answer #9 · answered by Seano 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Staged
2007-09-20 05:16:29 · answer #10 · answered by debrawashburn 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋