Kid Gets Tasered at Florida Kerry Forum

by Ryan on September 18, 2007

in Culture,Politics

Did you see this video from a University of Florida Kerry forum?  It’s all over the Internet, so I thought I’d contribute to the media over this fellow.  He reminds me of what’s wrong with some Millennials:  he seems to understand that he has the right to free speech, but somebody forgot to tell him that he doesn’t have a right to be heard.  His freedom to ask Kerry the “Skull and Bones” question was fine, but when the police asked him to move on, he made a big deal, as if his rights were being infringed upon.  I think the cops behaved coolly, calmly, and gave this kid every way out.  But, he chose to whine and cuss and make a big fuss in a public forum by disturbing the peace. 

The reason why we have cops at these things is to protect our officials, and in this case the guest of the University of Florida, John Kerry, from possible assassins or violence by wack-jobs in the audience.  It was a big problem in the 1960s and ’70s which has decreased dramatically because of increased security and better methods.  When this kid (not a small kid either) was asked by the cops to calm down and stop resisting while he was on his back, he stops for a second… then turns over again and continues!  So, the cops hit him with a taser gun.  His whines turn to shrieks.  Am I supposed to feel sorry for this kid?  Well, I don’t after he resisted arrest.  We used to respect the cops, for fear that they might have to use force on us.  It was a good deterrent.  Well, this kid is learning why one shouldn’t push the cops too far.  I think they acted appropriately.

AP photo.


Chris September 18, 2007 at 4:20 pm

Funny thing…I stopped at the mall on the way home today and was viewing the YouTube video of this in the Apple Store…I could see some people shaking their heads and also heard them say how the cops acted inappropriately and the kid’s rights were violated.

Anyway, I agree that ‘young skull full of mush’ acted inappropriately and the cops were totally within their rights and boundaries.

I will make an additional observation. The drive-bys will bury this story within a day or so because he was tasered at a Kerry event. If this were at a Bush event, or any Republican for that matter, this would be plastered all over the place; college kids had his 1st Amendment rights violated, police brutality, the Republicans set it up; yada, yada, yada. Same old stuff from the drive-bys.

Duncan September 18, 2007 at 8:09 pm

I watched more YouTube videos and witnessed what this student was doing. He was disappointed, to say the least, about John Kerry giving up his alleged victory in Florida in the 2004 election versus President Bush as proclaimed by one journalist/author. But then the student states, “we should impeach Bush…we impeached Clinton for a blowjob…,” when he was instructed to ask John Kerry a question rather than give a speech before his battery of questions. He asked John Kerry “if he and Bush were in the same secret society” hinting towards his reasoning for conceding the protest of the 2004 election. Then the good part happens. The student refuses to step away from the microphone, shouts out “why are you arresting me” to police when they tried to escort him away, and then further resists police in trying to keep the peace when he was face down on the ground. Then, justifiably, gets his unruly, disruptive, unrestrained, irrational, loud, impulsive, unrelenting arse tasered. It’s nice to see officers of the law doing their job in keeping the peace. I applaud them.

Jimi September 19, 2007 at 1:23 pm

When I watched the video I got the impression the kid who was excited, apparently he just heard of the skull and bones society, was infact walking away from the microphone when they grabbed him. It’s true he was pretty honery with responding to objections to his questions and the time he was taking. Also Kerry was pretty stand-offish about allowing him to set-up his question.

In another video they(unclear if it was the officers or someone else) ask him to restrict his question to a single question, but the Police seen in this video don’t really say anything before they grab him. It wasn’t like he was headed toward the stage, or about to reveal a bomb. Which in either case I would applaud these police.

I realize this opinon may not be popular with you but consider these rulings:

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

Thank you.

kai September 19, 2007 at 8:56 pm

“…but somebody forgot to tell him that he doesn’t have a right to be heard.” – that has to be the biggest load of crap i’ve ever heard.

He was, for the most part, appealing to the audience within beginning. There were no profound digressions unrelated to the topics provided nor was there any implication of an “instigation of a riot”.

Oh, and I love to hear statements such as “It’s nice to see officers of the law doing their job in keeping the peace”, when there are overwhelmingly high crime rates increasing within America, and hardly anything is being done to reduce them. Great job America! Lets shut out public statements and opinions! Wooohoo! I mean, Civil Rights were just handed to us right?

Ryan September 20, 2007 at 8:38 am

Apparently Kai, you do not understand the Constitution. You do not have a right to be heard– it’s not listeed there and it’s not implied either. That would mean that if you wanted to tell somebody off, they must, by law, sit there and take it. Hardly. I’m not legally bound to listen to anyone. I choose to or I don’t. I’d hate to think that freedom could be taken away.

Plus, just imagine how much violence there would be if the cops weren’t keeping the peace. Talking about civil rights, the protesters back in the day were arrested for violating an unjust law, but violating the law nonetheless. There was sacrifice and an appeal to the public for support. Over the years, with much pain and suffering, they got it. but there was sacrifice and many went to jail in the interim. But comparing this guy to people in the civil rights movement, like on par with Dr. King and SNCC, is a bit of a stretch.

jake September 20, 2007 at 5:49 pm

that first guy said “the drive-bys”

stop listening to rush, you uninformed schmuck

Ryan September 20, 2007 at 5:58 pm

Jake, you should look at a Pew Research poll from earlier this year, when they found after testing a number of avid news consumers on current events that Rush Limbaugh Show listeners empirically have a better understanding of the news than any other radio, or cable based news consumer, including the typical liberal retreat from good radio, NPR.

Also, just so you know, it’s usually better to come from an informed point of view when you start calling people schmuck.

Chris September 21, 2007 at 3:51 pm

I’m probably wasting my time with this, but I will, Jake, do you the service of educating you as it seems by your act of debasing the argument and your inability to understand the term drive-by, that you don’t get it.

First, the term drive-by refers to the act of the media picking and choosing stories that are sensationalist and agenda-driven (as in their liberal agenda, in case you are still unsure as to where I am going with this); then pulling back and moving on to their next target. When someone has the temerity to challenge them, the drive by media turns on the challenger looking to destroy them. To further educate you, Jake, and if you did your research I’d assume that you would know this. It was not Rush Limbaugh but Arthur C. Rowse who first used this term in the title of his book Drive-by Journalism.

And Jake, here is a link to the US Constitution. Take a gander at it and tell me where the young college student has a right to be heard.

I’m glad that I was able to provide you with this friendly service of education, Jake, so that you will be remember to do your research before hiding behind name-calling that masks your lack of knowledge of the issues.

Joe November 10, 2007 at 12:22 pm

Hi All. Just thought I would interject something here. If we follow the reasoning that people do not have the right to be heard to its conclusion then no one has the right to be heard. Hmm. See if you follow this. If no one has the right to be heard then why does the constitution have the first amendment? You know the right to free speech. No one says that you have to listen but that is your choice. We do have a right to free speech which I can see a good argument made for this college kid trying to assert his right. It is unfortunate that in this day and age we don’t all speak up more. Perhaps that is why we are a republic or is it a democracy? ;-)

Mike November 10, 2007 at 3:51 pm

“No one says that you have to listen but that is your choice.”

Exactly. He has the right to speak, but not the right to be heard.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: