Grabbing the bull by the tail

Was trying to figure out what has happened since the Taser incident last week ... and googled "UCLA." First up, not surprisingly, police brutality's 15 minutes in the spotlight has passed (to UCLA's relief, no doubt).

Second, when I finally scrolled down and found a related story - it was of course commentary. What caught my eye was the sentence, "I overheard a familiar victimization story unfolding."

Then,

"If the library personnel ignored the rule and let some armed gunman in without showing an ID and shot some students, the same people now protesting on the UCLA campus, would be protesting that security was inadequate."

and finally,

"It would seen if he had just shown his ID, none of this would have occurred.

A valuable lesson for you students out there. Rules are there for a reason. Obey them, as they are meant for everyone. You aren't special."

This argument isn't uncommon, I read it all the time. And as an abstract argument, it is completely valid - rules are rules, they are there for reason, rules must be obeyed, and no doubt - as human beings we criticize everything, so if armed gunmen did enter UCLA's library, there would be an uproar.

The point isn't that anyone is asking for special treatment, or for the police to bend the rules. This isn't about the rules, the student definitely violated the rules - that is clear. The point is this - UCLA police didn't merely come in and escort the student out, they tasered him. EVEN if he did resist as they argue that he did (with his hands cuffed behind his back) this incident would not have become as big an issue if they had not tasered him.

No one denies that rules were broken. Various arguments are flying around, but the most basic principle is - this was an abuse of power, plain and simple. The fact of the matter remains, this kid was no gunman, he had no weapons and was not a threat to anyone. Furthermore, HE WAS LEAVING!

I'm so frustrated by people that jump over that point, or better yet - say that its justifiable. If tasering a student for not carrying his ID card is justifiable, where do you draw the line ... isn't that a really low threshold for allowing someone to jolt your body with an electric current? What if you're pulled over for speeding, can a cop taser you when you try to negotiate your ticket down from reckless to - I mean, you did break a rule and are, in some form, resisting? What about if you were tasered as you reached over to your glove compartment to get your registration, after you argued with the cop about your speed - would that warrant a poke with the taser gun?

Sorry to beat this down, but I'm amazed at the ignorance out there.