Today at high noon, UCLA students staged a protest of the November 14th tasering of fellow student Mostafa Tabatabainejad by University Campus Police officers. As reported by pretty much every media outlet in the world, Tabatabainejad was using a library computer and failed to produce his student card for police, whereupon they tasered him repeatedly, an event which was captured on video.
As he was dragged away, he was heard to cry, “I’m not fighting you” and “I said I would leave.”
Let’s remind ourselves that one is under no legal obligation whatsoever to identify one’s self to police officers if one is not under arrest.
None.
There’s a large serving of “Blame the Victim” going on around the blogosphere, but let’s reduce this to the key issues:
-
Tabatabainejad was a bit of a jerkoff
-
that is not illegal
-
Tabatabainejad was within his rights to refuse to produce his ID
-
no crime was being committed, nor did the police have any reason to believe a crime was being committed or was going to be committed
-
the function of the police, in the absence of an actual crime, is to maintain the peace and public order
-
these particular officers could not be said to have done so in anything like an effective manner
-
unquestioning obedience to the arbitrary demands of armed authority is the hallmark of a police state and contrary to the goals of the Founding Fathers of the United States; it is inherently and perfectly un-American.
raincoaster 
It was my understanding that it is normal in the library, and on campus to check for student identification. i am also aware that certain areas are limited to students, and from time to time it is a good idea to spot check individuals for I.D. to ensure they are allowed to be there. The situation could of warranted further investigation or a specific check of someone if there was an anonomyous report of someone sneaking in to an area that they shouldn’t of been in.
I watched the video and I also heard numerous requests for this guy to present I.D., or leave. I also heard him repeatedly shout “fuck you”, and various other remarks that didn’t seem to appear that he was being cooperative. I heard the officers instuct him dozens of times to cooperate, but he decided not to.
What if this individual had turned out to be a terrorist or in the process of plotting something? Would we be protesting then? A few words of advice; if you’re told to do something, then do it. I don’t think it was unreasonable for this guy to show his student I.D., and if he didn’t want to, then he should of left. Sounds simple to me.
The good news for this guy is; he’s lucky it wasn’t me asking him for his I.D., because if he would of started running his mouth to me and acting out, I would of just beat the shit out of him!
The latest news is he’s filing suit, suggesting that he was targeted because of his name and nationality, suggesting that he was being profiled as a terrorist. News flash, these are things he is saying about himself, he is suggesting he looks this way and that’s how he is viewed, not anyone else. i guess it just goes to show you, don’t be so quick to shout discrimination, when you’re the one pointing the shit out you see in yourself!
That’s how I roll.!!!
Since when is it reasonable not to comply to a reasonable request to present identification? I wannabe on this jury when this case comes to trial.
BTW, Borrowed your leading photo, but not without linking it! Thanks!
The question is not whether it’s “reasonable” for citizens engaged in lawful business to have to present their papers to any clod with a badge (guess which way I lean on that).
The question is whether, having refused to present ID on command, having said you would leave in compliance with the orders of said clods, you should be tasered not once, but four to seven times–especially when said tasering is not used because you’re a threat, but because due to the impact of the taser, you can’t stand up when the order is given.
And of course there’s the whole issue of whether a taser should be used at all–particularly on a “suspect” who poses no threat.
Just hypothetically, assuming he was an armed intruder–or “terrorist” if you prefer, would it be better to see if he actually complied and left the building peaceably, or would it be more fun to encourage him to let fly the lead in a crowded public edifice by say, tasering him? Because cleary the taser can’t be too incapacitating if the victim can be expected to stand up and walk out afterward when ordered.
In the face of this kind of behaviour a lawsuit is overkill?
If you check the links you’ll see I already have the lawsuit story. Hell, I predicted days ago that the cops would be funding his grad school degree and year abroad as a result of this.
It’s certainly simpler to say “what if he had been a terrorist” but in fact he was an American citizen, enjoying his lawful rights. It may indeed be simpler to keep people in concentration camps “in case” but as I said, it’s un-American.
“That’s how I roll.” Spare me. Why aren’t you in Iraq, yo?
So the so-called vigilante comes down on the side of the police state, while his friend the freelance would-be assaulter also supports the fascist position. This is whatever the opposite of heartening is, but it’s your country. If you totally fuck it up it’s not my problem, really. I was just concerned for your rights. Apparently more than you are.
Benjamin Franklin.
Okay, I’ve calmed down and am not quite so snotty now. But I’m still a bit aghast.
My point is this: That “do what we say or we’ll hurt you” is behaviour expected of violent criminals. That “comply with the violent criminal’s demands or this is your fault” isn’t a point of view that does anyone any credit. And that the idea that we are not entitled to expect better behaviour from our forces of so-called law and order than we do of armed rapists is both incorrect and insidious.
People who are not doing anything illegal, and are seen to be not doing anything illegal, should be safe from violent attacks. Even from the Gazpacho Gestapo.
Can we agree on that?
A few words for Richard ( The Nazi) White who said ,”A few words of advice; if you’re told to do something, then do it. ”
The Nuremburg defence! I was ordered to do it!
Just remember this the next time some politician says that terrorists are threatening our freedoms: not a single freedom has been taken away from us by terrorists – they have been taken away by our elected officials.
This is common policy at the university. There is nothing unusual about being asked to produce ID.
He must bear some responsibility for his actions. He acted like an ass and he got burned for it.
It is not quite as black and white as some people wish it to be.
I think the laws exist for a reason, and the law clearly states that in the US you’re free to be as assoholic as you like but that the authorities are the ones whose actions are constrained. They acted outside those constraints in this instance (and here it’s relevant to mention the general reputation for overcompensatory brutality that LA cops of the regular and renta- varieties have. They’ve complained about the fact that video cameras interfere with their “interrogations” as we have seen here).
I agree that he bears responsibility for his actions. I do not think, however, that tasering is allowable under law for the crime of being an uppity student. How much sympathy would he have gotten if they hadn’t brutalized him? None; he’d be on camera, all over MySpace, looking like a jerk. So he’s a jerk. That is not in question.
Again I say that one of the reasons that the American Constitution and Bill of Rights came into being is not to circumscribe the actions of the populace, but of the authorities.
And Ozy, you’d have more credibility if you’d AHEM credit your sources when you, say, post about Dora the Exporer’s new aquapet.
Rain Coaster, you were about to win some agreement from me until you said this:
“I think the laws exist for a reason, and the law clearly states that in the US you’re free to be as assoholic as you like but that the authorities are the ones whose actions are constrained.”
If you want UCLA students to pay the necessary increases in tuition required to hire more professionally trained campus police, then fine. If not, students ought not to play “assoholic” games, but instead school themselves in ordinary adult courtesy.
Can we agree on that?
So UCLA students have to accept either tuition hikes or ‘police’ brutality?
“We have a lovely campus here, but if you want to avoid being tasered because our rent-a-cops don’t like your attitude it’s another three thou a year.”
So now we’ve moved from the idea that a police state is a good thing to the idea that student fees should include protection money?
Reminds me of something. Ah yes. Sorry I couldn’t find the video.
No, we cannot agree on that. I don’t think rentacops are a good idea; studies show they are far more likely to become violent than regular police. What should happen is that the campus should be policed by the regular Los Angeles police force, who are accountable to the citizens.
Should students be courteous? Yes, of course. Does courtesy require that they obey all demands of armed personnel? No, it does not, and Miss Manners will back me up on that. You can consult her books at the library if you dare.
Metro, you have surpassed yourself. Too bad about the video! It was a boot! I wonder if the thickheads would get it, even then? I see in 3 peoples comments a repetition of “normal” “not unusual” not or un”reasonable””common”produce or show”ID”. I’m glad I’m just “running” my mouth off in this electronic media, I would hate to get the shit beat out of me. Believe me it is not fun, I guess I have met some of your guests. Or is that stereotyping? Raincoaster did you know you were playing to “win” SOME agreement from any of us?
Of course. I always am. But allowing people to explain their specious arguments is an important part of the strategy. If they don’t want the rights guaranteed to them by law it’s not up to me to force them to be free.
BTW Lydia, what are you doing this evening? I’ve got cabin fever, was thinking about heading out for dinner. Want to meet somewhere?
Metro, on the trade off between quality campus security -vs- higher tuition costs.
You will realize, as you mature, that in this world we don’t always get what we pay for, but we always pay for what we get.
If you expect campus police to have BA’s in psychology, your tuition will have to cover part of the salary increases necessary to their recruitment.
Vigilante. I fear you misunderstand my point. The point is that it doesn’t take a BA in Psych to refrain from zapping with a taser gun someone who isn’t threatening anyone.
For what realistic, imaginable reason was this man shocked with a taser unit four or more times?
So, it all boils down to maturity? And $’s? No other point to make Mr. vigilante?
I think all the points on both sides of the argument have been made now. What’s strange is that not one single American has stood up for their rights in this thread. Not one.
Was it Jefferson that said America gets the government it deserves?
Are they back-off words?
No, if you’ve something original to say by all means do. I just don’t see that there’s much more to add, but I’ve been known to be wrong before.