True, he may have been over-the-top in the way he chose to frame his argument, and true, that is definitely not the best way to promote an open and free exchange of ideas. I simply think that the University police response was also over-the-top and misguided; why not simply shackle him and remove him? Were they so drunk with power that they decided they must make a public example of him and stun him with a taser?
He likely knew that, in resisting arrest, he was committing a crime and perhaps he craved the attention he was generating, but I don't believe he was asking to be tased. Furthermore, do University police even have the jurisdiction to claim resist of arrest and mete out punishment by force? I believe that at RIT they were supposed to handle the situation as best they could, and, failing that, only then call in the local authorities who are authorized by law to use force, detain in lock-up, etc.
Camden and Rockland (iirc) have recently authorized the use of tasers, but only in very strictly prescribed dangerous circumstances. I am not saying "stick it to the man!" Police have a very important and relevant job to do, but it seems that these campus police took their jobs a little too seriously and exercised poor judgment whilst their egos were inflated. Dissent, when not violent, does not call for a beat down, or tasing, or similar such "shut up or else!" treatment; they simply could have removed him quietly from the situation and then nobody would be up in arms about any of this.
He likely knew that, in resisting arrest, he was committing a crime and perhaps he craved the attention he was generating, but I don't believe he was asking to be tased. Furthermore, do University police even have the jurisdiction to claim resist of arrest and mete out punishment by force? I believe that at RIT they were supposed to handle the situation as best they could, and, failing that, only then call in the local authorities who are authorized by law to use force, detain in lock-up, etc.
Camden and Rockland (iirc) have recently authorized the use of tasers, but only in very strictly prescribed dangerous circumstances. I am not saying "stick it to the man!" Police have a very important and relevant job to do, but it seems that these campus police took their jobs a little too seriously and exercised poor judgment whilst their egos were inflated. Dissent, when not violent, does not call for a beat down, or tasing, or similar such "shut up or else!" treatment; they simply could have removed him quietly from the situation and then nobody would be up in arms about any of this.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment