The two articles that I read were on the subject of the student (Andrew Meyer) who was tasered by University of Florida police during a speech by John Kerry after asking Kerry if he had been apart of a secret society while in college. Both articles present the story from totally opposing viewpoints...
The first article I read was Jack Dunphy's. Dunphy basically supports the Florida University police and thinks that they did the right thing by tasing Meyer. Dunphy begins his article by saying, "There is an axiom in police work that goes something like this: If you have a lawful reason for wanting someone to behave in a certain way, first you ask them, then you tell them, then you make them." Many people have the viewpoint that the police were wrong in their actions, but Jack Dunphy comes to their defense. He says that the Florida police had good reason for wanting Andrew Meyer to settle down or leave the auditorium and that the police used reasonable force when Meyer did not comply with their demands. Dunphy points out that a man (presumably one of the university officials) can be seen in the Utube video giving a signal at which point Meyer's microphone goes dead, showing that Meyer's question was not one they wanted to be brought up. When two officers approach the student, he is loud an beligerant. He resists the officers and continues to yell throughout the auditorium. Jack Dunphy's point is that if Meyer had simply either calmed down or left without incident, the officers would have never even used the taser gun. So Meyer got what he deserved, right?
The article I read from the Political Critic site goes against Dunphy's argument and condemns the police's use of the taser. This author on Political Critic says that we should consider taking tasers away from campus officers all together. Why did Meyer need to be tasered if he had so many policemen holding him down, and he was already on the ground? The author also states: "The last time I checked, freedom of speech still exists in this country." All of this stemmed just from Andrew Meyer asking a question that someone else felt inappropriate. The author admits that Meyer was loud and obnoxious but also calls the policemen reckless and violent and says "if six police officers cannot handle an unarmed kid without tasing him, they need to find different jobs."
My viewpoint on the matter is this: I do not believe that the officers used reasonable force in this situation. When I watched the video I could not believe how loud and uncontrollable Andrew Meyer was acting. I mean he yelled throughout the entire clip... "What did I do?" "Help! Help!" "Why are you arresting me?" "Get away from me!" It was crazy. However, no matter how loud or crazy he was, he was never violent and never used force. It wasn't like he was trying to attack John Kerry; he never even went near Kerry. Plus, there were six officers detaining him. I just do not feel like the tasing was necessary. But then again, in the defense of the police, they did warn Andrew Meyer that he would be tased if he contin ued to resist arrest, which he did. So I am not sure if Meyer did not believe them or what, but for some reason he would not comply with their demands. So, as you can see, I am sort of torn between the two sides. Luckily, I do not have to be on anyone's side. I just have to talk about the two articles viewpoints on the matter, which I did. :)
P.S. I have seen "tasering" and "tasing". I thought it was "tasing". I've been doing searches, but it is still tough to figure out which is correct.
3 comments:
Really interesting. You ought to visit Lauren's blog, because she came to exactly the opposite conclusion. Great post. Keep it up.
Good job on finding two articles that oppose each other and looking at it from both sides. I watched several of the videos of it today, and I was disgusted. I'm glad that one of your articles pointed out the free speech thing, because that was the thing that really disturbed me. Yeah, the guy was worked up, but Kerry had opened up to questions, and the kid was just asking some questions. There was no reason to cut his mic and go after him just because someone didn’t want Kerry to answer those questions. How he acted after that (hell, I would probably scream and yell, too, if I was being attacked by cops for no reason) was entirely their fault. There's one video that shows the part after they get him out of the auditorium; he repeatedly asks why he’s being arrested, and the only reply that he gets is that he was “inciting a riot”. I think that that’s fucking ridiculous. Just my opinion, anyways.
I think this is an incident of people just overreacting. I also think the cops are a little trigger happy but that comes probably from not getting enough "action" from their job. If that's the case, we could haul them to Memphis. Though I would like to know if Kerry was part of some secret organization while in college.
Post a Comment