Tasers again (from Occupy DC this time)

[Benefactor]

Do you guys have an equivalent to the Independant Police Complaints Commission? It's not perfect, but it's better than letting the Police handle complaints about staff internally.

Also, seriously; tasered for that? I've seen puppies put up more dangerous resistance. Is there a major problem with your cops being overweight and weak?

 

[Ayn Rand]

Obviously told to make an example out of the first person to defy their authoritaa.

That said, they did it by the book and they had grounds - hard luck for him but he's got no grounds to complain by the looks of it.

 

[Traitorfish]

Do you mean legally, or ethically? I would suggest that there is a distinction.

 

[Benefactor]

I think I'm seeing a bit of "I don't like OWS so I don't care that protesters get tazed" here.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Do you mean legally, or ethically? I would suggest that there is a distinction.

I mean legally. As for ethics, they really didn't have to do that, but sometimes you can avoid a lot of trouble by quickly cracking down on the first person to cause a problem and making an example out of them. So the ethics have to be taken in the context of the tactics.

 

[Crezth]

I mean legally. As for ethics, they really didn't have to do that, but sometimes you can avoid a lot of trouble by quickly cracking down on the first person to cause a problem and making an example out of them. So the ethics have to be taken in the context of the tactics.

So what trouble do you think the cops were avoiding by electrocuting pajama-man?

 

[Benefactor]

So what trouble do you think the cops were avoiding by electrocuting pajama-man?

Others may have decided it was acceptable to wander around stoned in there pajamas. We dont want that .

 

[Traitorfish]

I mean legally. As for ethics, they really didn't have to do that, but sometimes you can avoid a lot of trouble by quickly cracking down on the first person to cause a problem and making an example out of them. So the ethics have to be taken in the context of the tactics.

Why? Tactics don't precede ethics.

 

[Ayn Rand]

So what trouble do you think the cops were avoiding by electrocuting pajama-man?

Unless I'm mistaken, at the start of the video he was shouting out swear words, no?

He gets away with it, others do it, you get a situation and it escalates.

Why? Tactics don't precede ethics.

What kind of critique is that? You do realise that situations have to be managed?

 

[Traitorfish]

Unless I'm mistaken, at the start of the video he was shouting out swear words, no?

He gets away with it, others do it, you get a situation and it escalates.

Escalates to what, exactly? Mass-renditions of dirty limericks?

What kind of critique is that? You do realise that situations have to be managed?

I don't follow; in what sense does the percieved need to "manage" a situation relieve you of an obligation to act in an ethical manner? Ethics isn't something that we only practice until it becomes inconvenient.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Escalates to what, exactly? Mass-renditions of dirty limericks?

Presumably it would escalate to a civil disturbance or riot, such as we have already seen OWS engaging in.

I don't follow; in what sense does the percieved need to "manage" a situation relieve you of an obligation to act in an ethical manner? Ethics isn't something that we only practice until it becomes inconvenient.

The police are only obligated to act in a lawful manner, which they did. As for the ethics, different considerations need to be balanced according to situation and the response needs to be flexible.

 

[Traitorfish]

Presumably it would escalate to a civil disturbance or riot, such as we have already seen OWS engaging in.

What are you basing that on?

The police are only obligated to act in a lawful manner, which they did. As for the ethics, different considerations need to be balanced according to situation and the response needs to be flexible.

The state is above morality?

 

[Ayn Rand]

What are you basing that on?

Distrubances in Oakland

The state is above morality?

The police don't act according to their own moral judgement - otherwise police officers would all go around enforcing their own private ethical beliefs instead of the law.

 

[aelf]

We usually have some people here who can give more or less reasonable arguments in support of police violence. Can someone explain to me why it was necessary in this situation?

Basically, disobedience justifies the disproportionate use of force. And "crypto-fascist" does describe people who think that way quite well. I'd even say it's correct by definition.

A crypto-fascist is a 'hidden' supporter of fascism. It is only truly applicable to individuals, as by definition a mass movement of crypto-fascism ceases to be cryptological. That is to say, a crypto-fascist has ideologically totalitarian views, but has not yet found a movement which sufficiently reflects these views, and thus remains 'hidden'.

I don't know why crypto-fascists have to find a movement, but the bolded bit is accurate as per Adorno's usage.

 

[Traitorfish]

Distrubances in Oakland

I don't follow.

The police don't act according to their own moral judgement - otherwise police officers would all go around enforcing their own private ethical beliefs instead of the law.

So in the case of a conflict between a police officers ethical inclinations and legal duty, he should always follow the law?

 

[Ayn Rand]

I don't follow.

There were some disturbances in Oakland, Oregon in the USA.

So in the case of a conflict between a police officers ethical inclinations and legal duty, he should always follow the law?

I would say that as a general principle this is the behaviour he should adhere to, else he is not a trustworthy and impartial police officer.

However, I wouldn't say "always" because there may be important exceptions.

 

[Quackers]

Brings this to mind:



Link to video.

Gosh that guy deserves it. Seriously the guy is on the floor with 4 grown police men all holding him down and sitting on him and he strikes him with the trunchon just completely out of the blue, it was totally not required! I'm quite amazed that the spectators actually ran out onto the pitch and gave them a good kicking, very brave and an interesting socoiogical proccess going on there...

 

[BSmith1068]

To those of you who think the police acted wrong here – what would have been your desired outcome of this situation? The guy was clearly resisting arrest, both verbally and physically, and it could have easily escalated very quickly.

Would you rather have had them tackle the man, possibly breaking a rib or smashing his face on the sidewalk – almost certainly requiring medical attention? Would you have shot him?

In my opinion the police brought this to a quick and relatively easy end. Tasing is not a fun experience for the tasee, but it sure beats many of the alternatives. In this case it stopped him cold and allowed the police to cuff him – all without any injury or need for further medical attention. In short, it worked exactly as it was meant to.

 

[holy king]

a tazer is a less lethal weapon.

it may kill. much more likely than a broken rib will kill you.

 

[Benefactor]

They could have talked to him, calmly explained that he was being arrested/detained and why, then taken him away. It works in Britain, and if it doesn't work; then restrain and cuff him.

Or, you know, just walk up and taze him.