And to think, I don't even have any British friends. I have to applaude the kid for having the guts to do something he really believed in though.
they arrested him while he was still talkingof course he didnt want to do what the police told him, because they were arresting him for nothing, and he obviously got frustrated. they didnt just tell him to shut up, they tried to kick him out of the place, for asking a question, wouldnt u get annoyed?.Policemen should be prepared for those kind of situations, and try to talk people into something before getting their hands on them (let alone use their weapons).
Oh wait, he did do something, in the video they tell him they arrested him for STARTING A RIOT!!!!!!!
very very poor image of freedom... for the country that drops bombs... for freedom...
hope noone gets offended by this!! :)
People here keep talking about breaking the rules and being impolite.
Once it was impolite not to drink from your 'designated' drinking fountain.
Once it was a rule that the color of your skin determined where you could sit on a bus.
Once it was acceptable to own human beings as farm equipment.
Some people spoke out and questioned these "norms". They too were treated with contempt. They were jailed, beaten, humiliated, and in some cases murdered. All the while, the masses stood by and watched, some with words on their lips such as "he had it coming" or "You do as you are told."
Civilization moves forward when we question these norms, when we take a chance, when we "offend" the common sensibilities of modern society.
Someone wrote here "The right to offend is not in the constitution". How astute. The right to post on Chess.com isn't either, but we're doing it. The right to eat chocolate isn't in the constitution either. I guess that means it's against the law.
The freedom of speech IS in the constitution, however, and it doesn't say "only outside of a university" or "only on wednesdays" or "only if you are white".
The freedom of expression is there BECAUSE IT OFFENDS. If everyone said sweet wonderful things, no one would object. The freedom is there to say "YOU are allowed, even if others object". Our freedom as a nation is determined by the extent to which we allow those to say things we DON'T want to hear.
I don't care if this guy was a prankster. I don't care if he was rude. I don't care if he was attention seeking. If we say he can't speak, if we say it's Okay "this time" to arrest someone for that, we set a precident. Once that is set, it's hard to repeal. Then, when something needs to be said, when a particular truth is crying to be told, no one will speak it. Because it's not polite.
Oh come on, what kind of argument is this? Maybe we should say that I have the right to kill people just because I'm more modern? You guys are so retarded saying I have no right to kill...
And no the freedom of speeche clause doesn't allow anything. Does it allows people to tell about military secrets? No. Does it allow people to march in the assembly and start singing songs? No. Think a bit.
it was retarded from those policemen to do what they did
who doesnt have a camera in a big event nowadays? not many people
who doesnt know youtube?
the ones who didnt think were those policemen, who are the "retarded douchebags of the week", but oh well, i guess that`s what it takes to be a policeman after all.
on the other hand, that kid got tasered, yes, and he also got arrested, yes, but he made his voice heard all around the world.
I am just so relieved that technology has brought us so far that we do not have to gun them down, like in Akron 35-40 years ago!
I can't believe that some people are really arguing that security should have let him ruin the event for everyone. The fuss is about the use of the taser, not about the police taking him away... which was perfectly normal... and happens everywhere, as it should.
Good lord. Please don't tell me you're comparing this punk kid to Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, and Frederick Douglass...
According to Faux News, he was charged with " resisting an officer and disturbing the peace".
Granted resisting arrest isn't a great decision, particularly given the fact that too many police officers do NOT serve and protect, and are basically nothing more than legitamized gang members (Like Wyatt Earp most likely was in reality) who abuse the powers they've been granted and flaunt the very laws they have sworn to abide by! They do all this mind you, with funding from MY TAX MONEY! I'm sure there are some decent cops out there, but every single oppurtunity they have had to make an impression upon me, except one single solitary time (and they still acted like a prick even then, but they did grudgingly do their job at least), they have managed to represent themselves as useless pompous thugs, unwilling to do the task that they were getting paid for. Who could possibly be taken into custody by such ::COUGH:: wonderful, gentle ::COUGH:: people and NOT fear for their safety!
The police need to be watched MUCH more carefully by a SEPERATE agency. Their screening processes at the academies need higher standards. Then, when more of them are actually doing their job properly (whether they really do care about helping people or not, if they witness someone run a stop sign and mow down a cyclist with their car, they need to STOP and check on the cyclist, not look them in the eye as they are getting up and drive right by!) we can talk about paying them salaries commesurate with the risks that SOME of them are taking.
riun the event for everyone?
dude, u are missing the point!!!
didnt u hear kerry in the back saying "that is a very important question i would like to answer" while that poor kid was being tasered!!!!
wtf! its the police who ruined the event!
lol
I think they should have let the situation play out like a movie,,,,you know,, suddenly a the light around this brilliant kid gets brighter, the crowd goes silent as thier jaws drop to listen to the stunning question that everyone has wondered about but feared to speak up about. Next Kerry with no escape, begins to shrink like a midget and then.....
You pick the music and ending. (:
Again, when was being disrespectful, juvenile, or cocky to an elected official grounds for arrest?
Only if the elected official in question is a Democrat. Republicans are fair game-just ask any Hollywood "comedian".
I've read this thread since it started, and have watched the incident on you-tube.
Is it possible that a better standard of behaviour could be expected from both parties? I certainly think the young man involved tried to use his "freedom of speech" as an offensive weapon. The police could have shown a little more patience and restraint. I'm not saying the young man deserved tasering, but he did go looking for trouble from those equipped with tasers.
In our societies (UK & US,) we're far quicker to use words like "freedom" and "rights" than "duty" and "responsibility."
I know this is slightly off topic, but what are the rules regarding the use of tasers in international chess games?
Some of you guys have been living a little too long in the USA, Canada and the UK. You should go live in Venezuela for a while and then when you are tired of a dictator and of not been able of express yourself freely, see this video again and think again if this kid did something wrong so that the police had to intervene.
Someone said "Freedom of speech isnt a trump card you can play anywhere and at any time you like." And... that is exactly what you CAN do with freedom of speech... you can say what you want, whenever you want about any topic that you desire. If your speach injures, discredits unfairly or slander somebody, then you have the right to be sued by the other person... not be tasered!
- You allow somebody to burn your flag... for freedom of speech. That is an amazing achievement, in our countries you would be jailed and probably beaten half to death for doing so... but you have advanced so that it is OK in the name of freedom of speach, for defending somebody that burns your flag insures that all other forms of freedom of speech are protected.
- You allow somebody to be neonazi as long as they do not attack somebody else in the name of free speech.
- You allow the KKK in the name of free speech.
This kid should had been escorted out and if what he said offended Kerry, well he could have sued him for something. Some say the took the mic and spend more time that the one he was allowed.... well I bet Mr. Kerry has done the same in the Senate or in the House or somewhere esle without been escorted out of the event.
This kid should had been escorted out and if what he said offended Kerry, well he could have sued him for something.
This has been discussed already. The police were trying to escort him out. He resisted, and that's when he got himself arrested.
Hmm. I don't know how I feel. I do not like the fact that the kid tried to hijack the event, but I also do not like the fact that Police tasered him.
Exactly my dilema with our security measures to prevent terrorism. I don't like them, but I also don't like to think that bad guys could exploit our freedom rights (freedom of movement, freedom of speach, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms) to attack us.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.