Don't tase me bro

I'm sorry for my ignorance, but really I don't understand it. Can someone basically explain to me the basics of what I just watched? Thanks.
 
I'm not too sure about the underlying argument. What I get from it is that the person who talks first is presenting something about the US elections in 2004, and then the one kid goes up with an opposite opinion from the speaker. He tries to convince everyone that this main speaker is wrong. The crowd starts to get irritated so the police are forced to "arrest" the kid so that a riot doesn't start.
 
Oh ok, that explains it then. I don't know enough to express my point of view on it still though, whether they were rigth to arrest him or not. Thanks for explaining it though!
 
No problem

In my opinion I think what the police did was a good solution. The audience was there to see the main guy talk and it could have gotten a lot worse if a riot started.
 
you don't have the right to be a fucking jackass, don't have the right to interrupt people like a bitch, or occupy fucking parks and shit (realizing this particular instance was from like... 2007?).
 
It's funny you say that, because with all these people facing questionable actions from police officers at the protests around the country, this is the sort of question you should be asking. However, at the time this video came out, everyone just thought it was hilarious that the guy called the cop "bro."
 
It makes me feel good. He was being a jackass and disrupting the entire event. It costs places a fortune to get top tier political speakers like ex presidents and vices etc some make retirerment careers out of it. He deserved to be tazed and when he started whining and pleaing like a little bitch it made me feel even less bad for him. Hippy suppresion
 
hahahaha, thats hilarious.. if you are getting arrested, whether they're in the right or wrong, you dont resist arrest.. sure if they wrongfully arrested you, take em to court afterwards, whatever.. either way, you dont resist arrest.

as far as i'm concerned, the dude was a jackass and deserved it.
 
meh, be liberal with the use of tasers. people want to be shit disturbers, tase em. who cares. you arent hurting them, but you're sure as hell controlling the situation when you're firing electricity through their body. it's a very effective detterent.

i'm all for it, just dont tase tiny women or children.
 
A riot? Are you kidding?

The only thing he was challenging was the Kerry's credibility. The police were totally out of line in that scenario.

Worst case scenario is that he finishes his question and Kerry is somewhat embarrassed. I don't give a fuck if he was grandstanding or legitmately posing a question. The police's reaction was completely unwarranted.

Saying a riot would have erupted is kind of ridiculous. The worst that happened is people stood up and left... the audience was more outraged at the fact that he was being tased from what I saw.

inb4 "Yeah man fuck da police!"
 
i think its the fact how the dude went about it. he was a total arrogant, in your face, deusche that went about it in a very non professional, disruptive manner. and thats why i think the police put a stop to it.

if he went up their and respectfully disagreed with the speaker, and respectfully presented his case or argument against him, he most likely would have gotten an answer..

and i do agree that a riot is a little far fetched.
 
read the entire story first.

It wasn't his first interaction with police during that same event. He already pretty much fought his way through just to ask the question.

He wasn't being arrested. He was being escorted out of the auditorium. He completely lost it and he started to resist, and they couldn't contain him without risking injury to him or themselves, so they tazed him.

You know what a good way to not get tasered is? Don't be forceful or irrational when asking a politician a question, then don't resist when they try to lead you out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top