:lol: “ouch ouch ouch”. All the people were laughing…well most of them. What a dumb ass.
[quote=“FightinMike,post:27,topic:35565"”]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/12/earlyshow/main648859.shtml
"When CBS News Correspondent Wyatt Andews first started looking into police use of the TASER stun gun a year ago, the weapon had been connected to more than 40 deaths. "
I’ve also seen estimates as high as 74 deaths, it is a decent electrical shock, administered enough times it could, COULD, cause damage…As I’ve already said, way less damage than a 9mm.
[/quote]
Ah, CBS, fair unbiased reporting…
Some interesting facts about 60 Minutes:
William Westmoreland
In the 1982 “The Uncounted Enemy, a Vietnam Deception,” which Mike Wallace narrated for CBS Reports, the news division’s documentary program, it was reported that William Westmoreland, former commander of American military operations in the Vietnam War, withheld information from decision-makers in Washington for political reasons. Westmoreland held a press conference a few days later, calling it a ‘preposterous hoax,’ and eventually sued for libel. TV Guide issued a report called ‘Anatomy of a Smear,’ detailing problems with the report, including the ignoring of contrary evidence, and video editing to change the questions Westmoreland is asked. Westmoreland withdrew the suit a few days before the protracted case was given to the jury. He and CBS News issued a joint statement in which CBS said it “does not believe that General Westmoreland was unpatriotic or disloyal in performing his duties as he saw them.” Westmoreland claimed a victory; CBS, in a separate statement, said nothing in the trial changed its stance that the report was “fair and accurate.”
Unintended acceleration
On November 23, 1986, 60 Minutes aired a segment greenlit by Don Hewitt, concerning the Audi 5000 automobile, a popular German luxury car. The story concerned a number of incidents where the car purportedly accelerated without warning while parked, injuring or killing people. 60 Minutes was unable to duplicate this behavior, and so hired an outside consultant to modify the transmission to behave in this manner, and aired a story about it.
The incident devastated Audi sales in the United States, which did not reach the same level for another fifteen years. The initial incidents which prompted the report were found by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Transport Canada to have been attributable to operator error, where car owners had depressed the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal. CBS issued a partial retraction, without acknowledging the test results of involved government agencies.[9]
A rival to 60 Minutes, Dateline NBC, would be found guilty of similar tactics years later regarding fuel tank integrity on General Motors pickup trucks.Alar
In February, 1989 60 Minutes aired a report by the Natural Resources Defense Council highlighting problems with Alar, a chemical sprayed on apples. Apple sales dropped and CBS was sued by apple growers. [10]
Werner Erhard, March 3rd, 1991
A 60 Minutes broadcast of March 3, 1991 dealt with controversies involving Werner Erhard’s personal and business life :Perhaps the most damaging blow of all against Erhard was a March 3 “60 Minutes” television report that detailed testimony from three of his daughters, several former EST leaders, and a housekeeper. Together, they accused Erhard of being a tyrant and a cult leader who declared himself to be God at staff meetings, administered a savage beating to his son, ordered his ex-wife nearly strangled to death during a two-day beating, and sexually molested one of his daughters and raped another.The “60 Minutes” report also detailed that Erhard had bailed out of his $70-million-a-year business. Published reports say he sold his human-potential movement empire in February to a group of his employees for an undisclosed sum and put most of his possessions (including the yacht where he lived in Sausalito harbor) up for sale. The San Jose Mercury News, speculating that Erhard may have fled the country, quoted a witness who said he watched three men load boxes and steamer trunks from Erhard’s warehouse into a Tokyo Express moving van.[11]In his 1993 book Outrageous Betrayal published by St. Martin’s Press, Steven Pressman detailed how Erhard filed but then withdrew a lawsuit alleging “false, misleading and defamatory statements” against CBS in the wake of the latter’s 60 Minutes program:[12]One year after the “60 Minutes” piece aired, Erhard filed a lawsuit against CBS and a variety of other defendants, claiming that the broadcast contained several “false, misleading and defamatory” statements about Erhard. However, Erhard dropped the lawsuit a few months before any court decision had been reached on its claims.[12]Author Jane Self defended Werner Erhard’s position in the 1992 Breakthru Publishing book, 60 Minutes and the Assassination of Werner Erhard.
Brown and Williamson
In 1995, former Brown and Williamson (B&W) Vice President for Research and Development Jeffrey Wigand provided information to 60 Minutes producer Lowell Bergman that B&W had systematically hidden the health risks of their cigarettes. (See transcription.) Furthermore, it was alleged that B&W had introduced foreign agents (fiberglass, ammonia, etc.) with the intent of enhancing the effect of nicotine. Bergman began to produce a piece based upon the information, but ran into opposition from Don Hewitt who, along with CBS lawyers, feared a billion dollar lawsuit from Brown and Williamson. Interestingly, a number of people in CBS would benefit from a sale of CBS to Westinghouse Electric Corporation, including the head of CBS lawyers and CBS News. Also, because of the interview, the son of the President of CBS Laurence Tisch, was among the people from the big tobacco companies in the risk of being caught having committed perjury.
Because of the hesitation from Hewitt, The Wall Street Journal instead broke Wigand’s story. The 60 Minutes piece was eventually aired with substantially altered content, and was missing some of the most damning evidence against B&W. The exposé of the incident was published in an article in Vanity Fair by Marie Brenner, entitled The Man Who Knew Too Much.[13] The New York Times wrote that 60 Minutes and CBS had “betrayed the legacy of Edward R. Murrow.” The incident was turned into a seven-times Oscar-nominated feature film entitled The Insider, directed by Michael Mann and starring Russell Crowe and Al Pacino.U.S. Customs Service
60 Minutes alleged in 1997 that agents of the U.S. Customs Service ignored drug trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border at San Diego.[14] The only evidence was a memorandum apparently written by Rudy Camacho, who was the head of the San Diego branch office. Based on this memo, CBS alleged that Camacho had allowed trucks belonging to a particular firm to cross the border unimpeded. Mike Horner, a former Customs Service employee, had passed the memos on to 60 Minutes, and even provided a copy with an official stamp. Camacho was not consulted about the article, and his career was devastated in the immediate term as his own department placed suspicion on him. In the end, it turned out that Horner had forged the documents as an act of revenge for his treatment within the Customs Service. Camacho successfully sued CBS for an unknown settlement, and Don Hewitt was forced to issue an on-air retraction.[15]
Kennewick man
A legal battle between archaeologists and the Umatilla tribe over the remains of a skeleton, nicknamed Kennewick man, was reported on by 60 Minutes (October 25, 1998), to which the Umatilla tribe reacted very negatively. The tribe considered the segment heavily biased in favor of the scientists, cutting out important arguments, such as explanations of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.[16] The report focused heavily on the racial politics of the controversy and also added inflammatory arguments, such as questioning the legitimacy of Native American sovereignty[17] – much of the racial focus of the segment was later reported to be unfounded or misinterpreted.[18]
Viacom cross-promotion
In recent years the show has been accused of promoting books, films, and interviews with celebrities who are published or promoted by sister businesses in the Viacom empire (2000-2005), without disclosing the journalistic conflict-of-interest to viewers.[19] However, due to media consolidation, this has become standard practice on many television news broadcasts.
Killian Documents
60 Minutes II ran into controversy in September 2004 when the program staff received a set of documents which alleged that, while in the service of the Texas Air National Guard, President George W. Bush was declared unfit for duty and suspended from service. On September 8, 2004, in the middle of the 2004 Presidential election, Dan Rather went on the air on 60 Minutes II with the documents. The authenticity of these documents was quickly called into question by experts and critics. This became known as the Killian documents controversy (or Rathergate).
For about two weeks Rather and his team stood by the story, but CBS later announced it could not vouch for the authenticity of the memos. The network stated that using the memos was a “mistake” and Rather apologized for the incident.[1][2] Their source, former Texas Army National Guard officer Bill Burkett, had misled a CBS producer about the source of the documents. The senior producer on the story, Mary Mapes, was fired, and three other producers involved in the story were asked to resign. It is often implied that Rather’s subsequent retirement was tied to this incident.
f that… i was routing for the college kid, i love the drama… i feel they should not have tazed him… way to drastic of a measure for an ivy league pussy student whom was already detained.
uncalled for imo.
I can’t believe how much discussion this has brought. After watching the video I thought it was blatantly clear that the kid was resisting, and not not following the direct orders of the officers. Good stuff.
[quote=“eesti,post:46,topic:35565"”]
I can’t believe how much discussion this has brought. After watching the video I thought it was blatantly clear that the kid was resisting, and not not following the direct orders of the officers. Good stuff.
[/quote]
It’s why this country is in the shape it’s in. It’s never your fault in the United States of ShiftBlameica, it’s always someone else’s. In this case it’s not the kid’s fault he got tasered, it’s the police, the college, and maybe even John Kerry. :cjerk:
Great CBS 60 Minutes link BTW. Anyone that would trust any “news” coming out of that station deserves to be tasered as well. 
You know, the more I think about it, the more I think “give him the taser” should SOP (standard operating procedure) for lots of things.
Problem: He’s wearin baggy pants.
Answer: Give him the taser.
Problem: He’s crying that we should leave Britney alone.
Answer: Give him the taser.
Problem: Ryan Seacrest is on way too many channels.
Answer: Give him the taser.
Problem: AFrank thinks everything is about whitey trying to keep the black man down.
Answer: Give him the taser. (sorry AFrank, I had to)
Problem: Chris Neil took a cheap shot at our captain.
Answer: Give him the taser. Then kick him in the head. I hate Chris Neil.
I mean really, the possibilities are endless. :lol:
JayS all I can say is…
:picard:
You and I will never agree, since I think people like you are what is wrong with this country, and you think people like me are what is wrong with this country
Yeah, the kid probably just needed a hug and a time out. :roll:
:lol: good, the little idealist “bringing down the man” shit deserved it.
when a cop asks you to do something, you do it. Period (or face the consequences).
He brought it upon himself. All he had to say was “ok sorry” when he was given the signal to wrap it up… or even just sit back down when the mic was cut.
Fuck, my 8 year old nephew has better social skills than that douche
[quote=“dozr,post:34,topic:35565"”]
FYI, it is common practice for officers to be trained to always yell this while apprehending someone regardless of what is actually happening. They do this specifically to cover their ass so most people will ASSUME the subject was resisting.
[/quote]
haha blanket statement. dont think it is true, but if it were would the porblem be that they did in fact train them to do this, and not so much the fact that we are so sue happy, that even when law enforcement is doing their job they have to cover their ass this way???
the FACT is that this kid was not cooperating. could 11 people hold one man down? yes.
can that one man then have access to 11 guns if he should happen, by some chance to get loose? hmmmm
the point is the taser is non-lethal. it keeps the cops at a safe distance. it extremely effective.
if you resist, in any way, while being placed under arrest, you should know that you are gonna get the taser. it will keep you safe. cops safe. spectators safe.
it really doesnt hurt that bad…cops who get tased so that they know what it feels like will tell you…yeah its a bitch, but afterward you feel ok besides 2 marks where the electrodes make contact, which isnt even really the case all the time due to clothing. the cops i know ran their 4mi daily run 30 min after being tased. it is really a momentary thing
[quote=“audios,post:51,topic:35565"”]
can that one man then have access to 11 guns if he should happen, by some chance to get loose? hmmmm
[/quote]
Not this guy :roll: This guy couldn’t fight his way out of an empty closet. Now if it was Jet Li, S.L. Jackson, Bruce Willis, then yeah taser that motherfucker, he might kill you if he gets loose or when you’re not looking.
Dude was empty handed wearing a tshirt and shorts and a Kerry debate/ open house. Where is he supposed to hide the weapons? If there are 5 cops kneeing him into the ground, I’m pretty sure they would have found some weapons if he had them.
I’m not saying the idiot isn’t responsible for what happened to him. He’s a douche, that is obvious. The cops didn’t need to taser him though. You can’t tell me with all the “training” cops have to disarm/control suspects that 5 of them needed a taser for a dude already face down on the ground and in handcuffs.
[quote=“Rx3,post:52,topic:35565"”]
Not this guy :roll: This guy couldn’t fight his way out of an empty closet. Now if it was Jet Li, S.L. Jackson, Bruce Willis, then yeah taser that motherfucker, he might kill you if he gets loose or when you’re not looking.
Dude was empty handed wearing a tshirt and shorts and a Kerry debate/ open house. Where is he supposed to hide the weapons? If there are 5 cops kneeing him into the ground, I’m pretty sure they would have found some weapons if he had them.
I’m not saying the idiot isn’t responsible for what happened to him. He’s a douche, that is obvious. The cops didn’t need to taser him though. You can’t tell me with all the “training” cops have to disarm/control suspects that 5 of them needed a taser for a dude already face down on the ground and in handcuffs.
[/quote]
but you are acting like tasering is on the same level as flogging.
i agree he doesnt look like he is a threat. but when there are lives at risk there is wayyyy too much gray area to try and let people decide that.
he needed to be tasered because its the safest way to subdue someone who is resisting arrest. PERIOD. safer than wrestling someone. safer than trying to get them to cooperate at gun point. and it is sure as hell much easier than shooting them with a ray-gun that makes them vomit and shit their pants. which cinciPD swat already has their hands on. that will be for special cases only obviously since you dont want to be handling this guy on the ground covered in shit n’ vomit
if you search for this guy online, you will see he perfomrs stunts like this often. he was doing it for show. he wasnt going to cooperate because he had an agenda. tase him
edit: and about hiding weapons. thats again a very gray area. you want to get him cuffed. you do not want to be frisking someone while other people are cuffing them because he might have a weapon etc. no, it isnt efficient.
rule 1. listen to cops.
rule 2 if you dont, you suffer consequences
it is the only way to take the gray area out of the equation the best you can. it will never be 100% but this is the closest
I fucking lol’d at this on the news today.
Then all the douchy college kids were protesting calling it police brutality. The kid was being a fuck and he got called out on it. 20 years down the road he is going to realize what a little bitch he was being.
[quote=“audios,post:53,topic:35565"”]
he wasnt going to cooperate because he had an agenda. tase him
[/quote]
:lol: I shouldn’t be laughing, but :lol:
Fine, zap the idiots. I’m not going to win this one.
And let that be a lesson to all you troublemakers. Obey the cops, OR ELSE!
Did they taser this guy in any of the other videos? I’d like to see because it’s pretty funny.
[quote=“JaysGreenLX,post:54,topic:35565"”]
I fucking lol’d at this on the news today.
Then all the douchy college kids were protesting calling it police brutality. The kid was being a fuck and he got called out on it. 20 years down the road he is going to realize what a little bitch he was being.
[/quote]
He was being an idiot no doubt. It’s a wider problem beyond that lone db. Law enforcement are supposed to be there to keep the peace. In many situations of late the law enforcement personnel are the ones making a scene. They shouldn’t be provoking trouble just so they can arrest people. They should have dragged him out of the building, maybe write an appearance ticket for criminal mischief or something stupid like that, and sent him on his way. If he was dumb enough to come back, then arrest him. Furthermore this shit clutters the judicial system and costs the taxpayers more money. Shit like this (and primarily drug laws) are the reason that the US a percentage of the population incarcerated that is ten time that of most of the civilized world.
I don’t know why people must make this about “he’s a dumbass, he deserved it.” With that kind of logic a lot of people on Capitol Hill ought to be tasered. Actions in these situations should be dictated by the threat of harm to the officers, the public, and the suspect - NOT whether somebody is being a dumbass or whether the cops feel like being pricks or whether somebody wishes to quell dissent.
roflo what a moron
[quote=“BrockwayMT,post:56,topic:35565"”]
He was being an idiot no doubt. It’s a wider problem beyond that lone db. Law enforcement are supposed to be there to keep the peace. In many situations of late the law enforcement personnel are the ones making a scene. They shouldn’t be provoking trouble just so they can arrest people. They should have dragged him out of the building, maybe write an appearance ticket for criminal mischief or something stupid like that, and sent him on his way. If he was dumb enough to come back, then arrest him. Furthermore this shit clutters the judicial system and costs the taxpayers more money. Shit like this (and primarily drug laws) are the reason that the US a percentage of the population incarcerated that is ten time that of most of the civilized world.
I don’t know why people must make this about “he’s a dumbass, he deserved it.” With that kind of logic a lot of people on Capitol Hill ought to be tasered. Actions in these situations should be dictated by the threat of harm to the officers, the public, and the suspect - NOT whether somebody is being a dumbass or whether the cops feel like being pricks or whether somebody wishes to quell dissent.
[/quote]
^ I would classify that as “disorderly conduct”. The cops tried to drag him out and he was pushing and fighting with them. As far as I am concerned the cops had every right to use non-lethal force to coax him out of the building.
Ten years ago I may have sided with the students but there comes a time when you have to grow up and realize that if you mess around with law enforcement they will make you sorry.
[quote=“JaysGreenLX,post:58,topic:35565"”]
Ten years ago I may have sided with the students but there comes a time when you have to grow up and realize that if you mess around with law enforcement they will make you sorry.
[/quote]
x2
i got tasered once it was pretty shocking…not by a cop but someone with a taser to see what it felt like. But i got up and wad fine
EDIT: shocking i didnt even intend to say that!!!