PodcastsGallery iPhone Matters
search


iPhone as Check on Police Brutality

Posted September 18, 2007 6:00 AM by Paul Levinson
Categories: Concept 

How many of you have seen the tasering of University of Florida student Andrew Meyer on your iPhone?  He was tasered by police after he was pulled away from the microphone by the same police, in the middle of asking John Kerry a series of questions about why he did not contest the election results of 2004.

If you haven’t seen the video of the incident, you can see it right here -

Now, I’ve wondered about the same thing myself - about why Kerry didn’t contest the counts in Ohio, and several other states.

But that’s not the point of this post - which is, I can see another important social benefit of the iPhone.  Its easy YouTube access means that videos of police brutality, such as occurred with Andrew Meyer in Florida, will be more accessible than ever to the general public.  Which is good.

Video allowed the public to see the Rodney King beating - nothing the police said in its aftermath could contradict what the public was able to see with its own eyes.  YouTube has taken this once step further - allowing us to see such videos without having to wait for television to show them to us.  And the iPhone has taken this one step better, again, by allowing people to see such videos when they are away from their desktops and laptops.  All of this is by no means stopping police from trampling on First Amendment rights - but it is making it harder than ever for them to get away with it.

 

 

Permalink | Email This | Comments (34)

Comments

  1. Sue them!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by Pat on September 18, 2007 7:25 AM

  2. dumbass.

    Posted by Pat on September 18, 2007 8:23 AM

  3. except that the Iphone cant record a simple video like this one in order to capture events like this as they happen

    Posted by lol on September 18, 2007 8:34 AM

  4. This guy was being completely retarded and got what he deserved.  This is not Rodney King - this is someone who continued ranting and raving at the speaker after his alloted time at the microphone was up (1 minute for a questiuon was the forum rule) and continued fighting his restraint/removal for nearly a minute after he was warned about being tasered.

    Posted by Yatzhee on September 18, 2007 8:50 AM

  5. Sounds to me like young mr meyer got what was coming to him, would have been funny to watch but I have not seen it yet. Does it occur to any of you lefties that kerry didn’t challenge the election because he LOST FAIR AND SQUARE!!!

    You know it was refreshing to watch the 2006 election results even though my side didn’t win. Did anyone besides me notice how republicans handle a disappointing loss in a close election? Did we whine and cry like little babies? No. The cops should taser more of you pathetic whiners.

    Posted by Winston Smith on September 18, 2007 8:57 AM

  6. What a shock that this nut who got tasered is a journalism major. I don’t think they even let you in J-school unless you are a left-wing nut job. The taser must have stung a bit, but it was an excellent career move. He’ll have job offers pouring in by this afternoon.

    Posted by Winston Smith on September 18, 2007 9:03 AM

  7. Winston - did you hear about something they call the First Amendment?  It’s right there in our Constitution, the Supreme Law of the land ...

    You sound like you’d be more comfortable in maybe the former Soviet Union.  I’ll see what I can find out about available time machines for you…

    lol: true, but video cams are so widespread, that the more important benefit of iPhones is that they make YouTube so easily available…

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 9:28 AM

  8. Hey Winston, Rush called.  Can you deliver him his 500 units of Oxycontin please?

    Posted by Aimee on September 18, 2007 9:43 AM

  9. Does the first amendment mean there are no rules and no limits ever on any speach of any kind in any venue? Let me explain it to you as I would to a four-year-old.

    When the police tell you to do something, your choices are either A)Do as you’re told; or B)They taser you in the nuts. Thrashing about violently while screaming ‘hey bro don’t taze me!!!’ is not one of the choices.

    Even if the cops are in the wrong (as they frequently are) they are the people we have empowered to enforce the rules. Meyer broke the rules, then resisted. Thus he got tasered in the nuts.

    Posted by Winston Smith on September 18, 2007 9:54 AM

  10. Rodney King got what he deserved.  Most people never saw the entire video.  I caught it late one night in its entirety just after the incident.  Before the officers were seen beating him, he was fighting and literally throwing officers around like rag dolls.  He sent one flying up onto the hood of a patrol car.  I don’t think they beat him enough.  He had led officers on an extremely dangerous high speed (over 100mph) chase and was on drugs.

    As for Mr. Meyer, he knew there was an alotted time and he went over.  Then, he kept going.  When asked to leave, he did not.  When the police tried to escort him out, he resited.  When he resited, he was taken down and cuffed.  When he STILL did not stop resisting, he was hit with the taser.

    Had he simply followed the rules, none of this would have happened.  Yes, there is free speech but there are rules for some occasions.  There were many people who wanted to ask questions, so there was a time limit imposed.

    Posted by Jeff on September 18, 2007 10:50 AM

  11. “Even if the cops are in the wrong (as they frequently are) they are the people we have empowered to enforce the rules.”

    Where did you get your information?  I was not aware that the police are “frequently” in the wrong.  Yes, on occasion, there are instances where this is true, but not in the overwhelming majority of cases.

    Posted by Jeff on September 18, 2007 10:56 AM

  12. Winston: do you have a problem reading English?  Here are the applicable words from the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech or press…”  Does that answer your question?

    I should also add that the 14th Amendment says states are not allowed to deprive citizens of any rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 11:07 AM

  13. Jeff: I agree with you completely - most police officers, the vast majority, almost all of them, in fact, do a fine, law-abiding job.

    Winston’s knowledge of what police do is as faulty as his knowledge of the Constitution.

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 11:10 AM

  14. Watch the secret service guy behind the cops before they grab him.

    No he was not removed for going over time. Kerry was saying “that’s a very good question”. No, watch the secret service type guy behind the cops…he’s saying cut it…the questions were not allowed by the administration.

    Posted by notsafe on September 18, 2007 11:23 AM

  15. This kid is the biggest pussy I’ve ever seen. The little drama queen whines and yells like he’s being raped as they gently move him away from the microphone (which, by the way, he had no right to use after his time was up.) Then when he gets tased he screams like he’s being beheaded by islamic militants. Please. This pussy needs a real beating.

    Posted by bridgie on September 18, 2007 11:59 AM

  16. Ugh, this was a private forum held by a student organization.  So it would be like if you were at my house when I was having a private party and I directed my security forces to bounce you from the party. 

    There were absolutely no rights violations.  This isn’t complicated folks.

    And to those who think free speech means just that, you are wrong.  There ARE restrictions.  Ex.  You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie theatre.

    The kid got what he deserved.  Obviously if Kerry thought something wrong was going on he would have said a lot right then and there.

    Posted by John on September 18, 2007 12:12 PM

  17. I don’t know why we have so many nut lickers in this country.  This young man asked a few simple questions and the fuzz jumped his ass like he was Osama.  Can’t you crack heads see that your licking the nuts of the cops is not going to get you anywhere when they decide it’s your turn to pay.

    Maybe you can step out of line one day and not lick nut, as you are obviously inclined to do, so that you can get a first hand appreciation of his treatment.

    One day when you get their balls out of your mouth you will be able to understand he had every right to kick the cops asses. 

    Now he is going to sue them and since you want to lick em up, why don’t you go and give them your money so they can be happy pigs?

    Posted by Golumn on September 18, 2007 12:30 PM

  18. John: I’m afraid it’s you who have no understanding of the First Amendment, or what the yelling fire in a crowded theater ruling means.  It means that speech which leads to a clear and present to life, limb, or property can be restrained (and, frankly, I think even that is a violation of the First Amendment).  But in the case of Meyer, did you see any threat he was making?  I certainly didn’t.

    And, by the way, Kerry just came out and condemned what the police did.  And several of the officers in question have been suspended.

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 12:45 PM

  19. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297197,00.html

    The police plan to charge him with felony disruption of a public event. So, NO, it was not a private event.  Plain and simple, he was tasered because he was not compliant with police orders to waive his rights, which is NOT a lawful order. He was in violation of event rules, perhaps, but those are not LAWS. He may have a case for violation of his rights, but what he did should be called civil disobedience, sort of like a tea party we had 224 years ago. 

    What he did is similar to events in the Continental Congress, where passions and disagreements were at a fever pitch. Those who participated then would be appalled by this management of the political process by armed thugs with badges, who call themselves public servants.  It is completely against the ideas of freedom to use the police power of the state to control political discourse. 

    The young man made no threats, attacked no one physically or verbally, but was ordered to cease a political statement, one which our constitution guarantees him the right to make, and this was a forum expressly intended for that activity.  He was detained because he was doing exactly what the event was for.

    Please read the link to an article on FOX, above.  Even the university President is concerned about the response by the cops, as is Mr. Kerry.  This is purely an attempt by the police to intimidate free speech, and if you believe the ACLU, a violation of civil rights.  Two of the officers have been suspended.

    So for you mental midgets who believe he had it coming , I hope you enjoy your stay in the fantasy world where government might makes right.

    Posted by David J. on September 18, 2007 2:46 PM

  20. Good comment, David.

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 2:54 PM

  21. He’s a nut job. Get the whole story.

    Posted by scott on September 18, 2007 3:22 PM

  22. He wasn’t even asking a question, and it wasn’t even his turn at the microphone to begin with. He cut in front of everyone then launched into some ridiculous, combatitive rant, and still he was allowed to speak for at least double the allotted time. When police moved to escort him out he started shrieking like a little sissyboy and shoved at least one uniformed police officer. Cops hate it when you do that.

    I still say it was a brilliant career move for a young journalism student. They will probably give him an editor’s job at Time magazine.

    Posted by Winston Smith on September 18, 2007 4:28 PM

  23. Winston: Cops hate it?  I hope these poor excuses for cops get a chance to nurse their hatred behind bars, which is where they belong.

    Scott:  I think you’re the one who needs to get the whole story - which is, people have a right to speak at public events in this country, whether they are nut jobs or not (as long, of course, as they are not physically threatening anyone).

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 4:46 PM

  24. I pose a few very simple questions to those of you criticizing the conduct of the police:

    1. How long should Andrew Meyers have been allowed to use the microphone? As long as he wished? For any purposes? Is it possible that there is a point at which free speech can cause a disruption that needs to be addressed in order to facilitate the completion of an understood goal? How long and how far would you let him go? Isn’t there a reasonableness standard out there somewhere? Where a majority of people would agree he’s gone too far? That a line has been crossed?

    2. Assuming any reasonable person would agree there IS a line that can be crossed- How do you stop the disruption? Especially with an individual who is uncooperative? How about with an individual who is physically combative?

    Were this kid’s freedoms REALLY violated? The fact that we’re even having this debate is evidence that our rights and freedoms are well-intact. The fact that this kid got roughed up a little (and it WAS a LITTLE, folks) after intentionally and knowingly approaching that LINE we should all agree exists, is really of NO consequence. The fact that a free debate has sparked, however, IS.

    Posted by bridgie on September 18, 2007 5:49 PM

  25. Andrew Meyer is no different from the guy running naked onto the field at Yankee stadium with ‘BUSH LIED!!’ painted on his butt cheeks. Those guys don’t get much TV time anymore though. Little Andrew is getting all kinds of TV time, which of course was his entire goal for today. Have to hand it to him his plan was an unqualified success. And the entire kook left is defending him to the end. No wonder it’s so hard to take you people seriously.

    Posted by DON'T TAZE ME BRO!!! on September 18, 2007 8:26 PM

  26. bridgie -

    1.  You’re posing this question incorrectly.  Whether an amount of time is too long depends on all kinds of factors, including what specifically the talker is saying, were there specific lengths of time posted publicly before the speaker began, etc.

    In Meyer’s case, the pertinent question is: was he talking too long in this case?  You can see how long he is talking on the video.  It was just a few minutes.  Does that truly seem like too long, under any reasonable interpretation?

    2. This question is very appropriate.  And the answer is: you taser someone when there is a threat of violence.  Did Meyer, on the floor, look like he was a real threat?

    As far as what you do with a geniuinely verbally disruptive person:  if they continue to talk, you surround them with a group of guards, and you usher the person away from the mike.  You don’t do what those lame excuses for police officers did.  You certainly don’t taser.

    Don’t Taze: The news that someone with your level of reasoning doesn’t take me seriously makes me very happy.

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 8:44 PM

  27. All these people saying the gentleman got what he deserved are absolutely right.  If you want freedom of speech, freedom from police brutality, freedom to question your leaders, move to Canada!  This is a theocracy and fascism, so you better watch what you say OR ELSE!

    Posted by Anthony Cora on September 18, 2007 9:05 PM

  28. Well gosh mr paul levinson, I must say I feel vindicated as public opinion overwhelmingly agrees with my assessment that little andrew the taserman is just a brainless jackass who got what he deserved.

    In the unlikely event that I would attend a speech by John Kerry, I would want to hear…John Kerry, not some witless undergrad parroting a tired old conspiracy theory. The cops were absolutely justified in tasering his dumb ass.

    The saddest part of it all is that his plan to draw attention to himself worked so successfully, and will now be repeated again and again. Thanks to geniuses like paul here who think this Sacco and Venzetti all over again.

    Posted by Winston Smith on September 18, 2007 10:56 PM

  29. “thanks to geniuses like Paul”  -much appreciated!

    Posted by Paul Levinson on September 18, 2007 11:00 PM

  30. Faciest imbecile.  You are not the first.  You are a shameless cop nut licker WINSTON, and that must be what makes you special!

    Did you grow up that way or were you converted to it at church?

    Posted by Golum on September 19, 2007 11:12 AM

  31. I saw all three videos.  He did absolutely nothing wrong.  He asked the cops (who shouldn’t have been in
    charge of keeping time) if he could ask his questions
    and they said he could.  When they reneged he hurried
    through his litany, and when they cut his mike and started towards him, he raised his arms (one of his hands still held the Greg Palast book) and tried to back away.  The two female cops tried to push down his arms.  He was cuffed, downed, tasered & arrested.

    Posted by OakRaidFan on September 19, 2007 11:33 AM

  32. I’ve actually been arrested by the same lady cop who tasered the kid and shes a fucking cunt. hope they get sued and lose their jobs

    Posted by G on September 19, 2007 12:33 PM

  33. I GOT ARRESTED FOR POOPING IN PUBLIC AND I THINK THAT THIS ISSUE IS A SHAME ON THE AMERICAN GOVERMENT> GOD BLESS . I <3 THE IPHONE. IT MAKES ME CUMMMMMMMMMMM——PLEETE

    smile:):)

    Posted by J$ on September 20, 2007 5:42 PM

  34. OH MY LANTA…. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH J$....I PHONE MAKES ME WANNA WEE WEE…

    EVERYBODY CUAS NOW!

    CUAS! CUAS! CUAS CUAS CUAS!!!!

    Posted by Ronaldo Ortega on September 20, 2007 5:56 PM

Submit Comments

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Forums | About | Contact | Press | Privacy

©2007 sterndesign, LLC. All rights reserved. All trademarks and copyrights remain the property of their respective owners. Proudly powered by ExpressionEngine. Dedicated hosting by pMachine Hosting