Dept of Guys Called Jon: "Are We Tasering People Enough?" (plus bonus Jon Stewart clip)

posted by Damozel | Our favorite sensible conservative, Jon Swift, has published his take on the tasering incident at the University of Florida: Are We Tasering People Enough? As always, the great Mr. Swift is not troubled by the doubts that assail the rest of us.

I am 100% in favor of tasering obnoxious people, whether they are conservative, liberal or radically moderate. In fact, I don't think we are tasering people enough and that this country would be better off if we had more tasering not less.

I think we have all seen political events where someone talks on and on or is irritatingly impassioned about their narrow agenda. If we armed security at all of these events with taser guns, I'm sure people would think twice about hogging the microphones and boring us with their speeches about issues we don't care about. Tasering has a remarkably calming effect on people....  (Are We Tasering People Enough?)

Of course, this very funny post ignores the fact that the tasering was an act completely independent of the student's relative annoyingness and obnoxiousness.  He wasn't tased for being irritating, but in consequence of failing to cooperate with the police, once they asked him to leave.  As to that, I have no comment.  It's a point on which I feel I must reserve judgment.  I'm still hearing a lot of different versions of what happened, and I wasn't present.

Swift muses on the aftermath: the flip-flopping of the gleeful conservatives and defensive liberals who initially saw the event as a chance to bash/repudiate poor old John Kerry.  I was interested to read that this had happened, since I haven't really been following the aftermath of the aftermath.

At first conservative bloggers seized on the story of Andrew Meyer's tasering at the UF forum as another example of the unjust treatment of conservatives in our society, not to mention another chance to attack John Kerry....

 But a funny thing happened on the way to the blogstorm. It turned out that the student was not conservative but was in fact so liberal he was to the left of Kerry. The initial enthusiasm for Meyer began to wane with this revelation. "No, he isn't one of ours," wrote Dan Riehl, saving his long, self-pitying treatise on how unfair the world is to conservatives, which we are all looking forward to reading, for another day. "Good for the campus police because Meyer deserved what he got," said John Hawkins at Right Wing News. Somehow the idea of a liberal getting tasered didn't seem quite so outrageous after all... 

Although some liberal bloggers are now tentatively saying that the police may have gone a bit too far, they don't seem quite so outraged as the conservative bloggers almost were. Something seems to be holding them back. Sure, the First Amendment sounds good in theory, but perhaps tasering some annoying people might not be such a bad idea and it wouldn't be prudent to come out against tasering per se. There are a few conservative bloggers, some liberals must be thinking, who
could use a good tasering.

(Are We Tasering People Enough?; all links in original)

You'll want to read the rest of it, naturally.   

Sadly, some of those who have commented on this article were a bit confused by Mr. Swift's special brand of "sensible" "conservatism."  In his new column, "Swift Reactions," Mr. Swift observes:

Although some readers agreed with me that we are not tasering people enough,  Stan was so upset with my piece that he wrote, "I swear I thought this was a parody" and called my post "obnoxious," implying that I deserve tasering myself. Then he apparently had second thoughts and awarded himself the "idiot of the day award." It takes a big man to admit when you are wrong, Stan. Of course, my pieces are not parody as you originally thought and I am glad you corrected yourself. Swift Reactions  

RELATED BN-POLITICS POSTS

1.  Disruptive Student Tasered at Local John Kerry Event: What Really Happened?  (Updated)
2   Tasers, Truth and Lessons Learned

BONUS!  Jon Stewart, in case you were wondering what he thinks about it all.  He surprised me, frankly:

Comments

[Charles]

You missed an important element of the story. According to film up at Raw Story, the police only advised Meyer of the reason for arrest well after they Tasered him. At that time, they told him he was under arrest for inciting a riot, a clearly bogus charge.

I think Woman of Mass Discussion might want to reconsider her statement that "This was not a case of UPD acting inappropriately." A lot of people, including their superiors, have some doubts on that score.

[Damozel, Administrator]

I understood her to be saying that they weren't acting inappropriately by asking the student to leave and attempting to escort him from the venue.

She says in her note that she couldn't see what happened afterward, including the events immediately preceding the tasering.

And yes, the University is currently conducting an investigation into the incident. The link I posted above discusses the reaction of the University and UPD.

[Charles]

She says that she is taking sides, Damozel. She says that Meyer got what he deserved. I don't think I've misinterpreted what she said at all.

Everyone should look into what the definition of torture is: "under 18 U.S.C. sec. 2140A: an “act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.”

We have become so hardened that we don't recognize torture when we see it. It occurs every day in American jails and prisons. It was obvious from day 1 that it was being committed in Guantanamo. All Americans are complicit in these deeds to the extent they refuse to see them for what they are.

Sometimes three feet away is the worst place to be if one is to be an impartial witness.

[Damozel, Administrator]

Charles:

As I read it, WMD said she supported the removal of the student from the event. She found his behavior offensive. As to the actual tasering, I thought her argument was that he had the chance to avoid the consequences of his behavior and therefore brought the consequences on himself. At any rate, that's the way I read it... but I really shouldn't speak for her, I guess.

I would frame the issues here differently from you.

I don't see this event as equivalent to the torture of prisoners or victims of a criminal act. Based on what I saw, this wasn't an instance of a person---helplessly at the mercy of an official and without any degree of control over the outcome--- being subjected to physical abuse as a means to an end. Nor was the taser applied by the police in order to "encourage" him to divulge information, to humiliate him or for their own entertainment.

They used it to subdue him to overcome his resistance and---quite possibly; I couldn't see what was happening---because his resist was putting them at risk of bodily harm. As to whether the use (or degree) of force in this situation was reasonable from a legal standpoint, I don't know; I can't see what happened on the video and am not really up to speed on the standards that apply. You cite the account at The Raw Story, but I have heard other accounts.

Whether tasers are EVER an appropriate instrument for the police to use in a case of this kind is an important question which this incident has brought to the forefront of public attention. Assuming one concedes that the police under some circumstances have the right to subdue a person resisting an arrest, I don't know what the alternatives would be or whether they would be even worse. Not knowing exactly what standards apply, or what went on after the police attempted to take the student into custody, I'm not at this time prepared to conclude that they acted outside the bounds of what the prevailing standards allow.

As to the moral issues, I am---or until recently was---a God-bothering Quaker sort of person, so there is a disjunct between what I believe for myself and as a general ethical principle, and what I recognize as legal by current secular standards. In any conflict, I am all about the 'friendly persuasion,' but of course this is not (yet) the general rule ANYWHERE in the world.

In any case, it is far from the case that I am hardened to torture or to the use of force. And I'm pretty sure that we're all unanimous in that.