While we've all heard the story of the University of Florida student being tasered, some refuse to know the whole story.

This was never a freedom of speech issue. It is more of an issue of when the authorities should apply the "use of force". Many of the videos that are being shown have been cut short and edited for a completely different cause.

While I watched a short clip of the video, my first thoughts were that this guy must be "on" something to get so worked up and loud. He HAD to know where this would lead with his flailing about. It just wasn't surprising to me. I was unable to make out what his questions were, so I just assumed he was against what Kerry stood for. Although, I had never witnessed a conservative get all vocal and passionate in this sort of setting. It wasn't long before I saw a more lengthy video and read a more complete account of what happend.

The 21 year-old Andrew Meyer pushed his way to the front of the line just before they announced that the Q&A was OVER. He forced his video camera into the hands of a female student that was inline ahead of him and told her to start video taping his questions to Kerry. After causing a commotion, John Kerry agreed to take ONE question from the kid. Andrew began the questioning, but never paused to let Kerry answer the first of many questions. He was asked to stop talking, which he refused, and eventually they turned his mic off when he used profanity. He stepped away from the mic and continued the questioning, turning to the girl with the camera and asking if she was getting all of this. He moved towards the stage and the authorities closed in. He never complied and began forcefully pulling away, pushing the officers from him. At this point he had broken the law. He was disrupting a peaceful assembly. He was screaming and ranting while the officers repeatedly asked him to stop resisting. He resisted arrest when escorting him out did not seem possible. Even after they managed to get him to the floor and you can hear an officer clearly warn him that he would be tasered if he did not comply, he continued to keep his arms moving and screamed "don't taser me, bro!" and "help me!" The drama was almost comical.

Soon after, we hear eye-witness accounts that he was purposely being over dramatic when the cameras were on, but calm and laughing when they were not around. As he was riding in the back of the police car, he told the officers that he was not mad at them and he knew they were just doing their job.

Andrew Meyer is on the student newspaper staff and has a website of his own. The video of his claim to fame was posted immediately to youtube and his website. While he has made no more statements to the media, UF students have turned out by the hundreds to protest the campus police and their rights of Freedom of Speech. In addition, national media attention with their edited video versions were circulating and causing big debates. The University president, worrying about the bad publicity and possibly a law suit, immediately came out with a statement claiming he was disturbed by the incident and would be investigating the campus police. Two officers have been suspended and may possibly lose their jobs.

In light of the VT incident not too long ago, I'm saddened by the restrictions that the authorities have when it comes to incidents like this. There was no way to tell whether this kid was armed or what his intentions were. I don't know what other choices officers have in detaining a subject, but I feel that they took the proper steps in the correct order. Andrew Meyer put many lives at risk for his own personal gain. He is a selfish, undisciplined and careless man.

Article on tasered student

Very informative. You are right that many times the media fails to give us the full story. It seems we live in a "sound bite" world right now. Thanks for posting.

Wow, that is so interesting. I am not surprised by your account and feel that it is genuine.

Our sound bite world may turn aound to bite us someday when the police aren't there anymore.

Sad really.

I believe we need to maintain the freedom of speech as much as we can. The day we can longer question and criticize is the day we are no longer a Democracy. However, I think there are ways of getting your point across without resorting to what this individual did. Anyway, I fully support peoples right to think and say what they will without fear of rights being taken away. Yet, with this freedom comes the responsibility for the speaker too.

I think the Senate condemnation of Petreus...had a chilling effect on free speech. So did this tazing incident. I understand the provoker was trying to point out what's in store ..if the 60's type protests should ever start up again. The Editor of the college newspaper that wrote..F*** Bush..was challenging free speech. Wanting limits set..or a dialog. Where do we draw the line. The pendulum swings. I don't like the direction it is swinging today. I feel oppressed. VERY.

Freedom of Speech also carries a responsibility. Your right to free speech can't infringe on someone elses rights, which if I am understanding correctly, this could have been what happened here. It seems the gentleman pushed past others and denied others the right to speak and carry on a peaceful assembly. I think he was very selfish and didn't care about the consequences of his actions on him or anyone else. Perhaps he staged the whole thing, because he is immediately much louder than anyone else in the room as if he were speaking directly to the cameras. I'm afraid the point he may have been trying to make, will in the end, cause further limitations, instead of more freedom.

well, that's the dialog this student was trying to get started. What IS free speech, and what are our rights? He took it to the point of civil disobedience for the purpose of making headlines and starting dialog. Like nuns that cross picket lines to protest nuclear arms. Protest and the law have been a part of this country for years. From Union Labor Strikes, to Suffrage to Civil Rights. and there is always a new climate as we move from one controversy to another ..as to what will the law do, what our our protections under the constitution. Good stuff, lucky we live where it's not CHINA and the pro democracy protester was meant with a tank. But when would tanks be appropriate. From tazers...to..tanks. These are the questions the new generation entering adulthood and taking the reigns need to grapple with today. I always..say...when you lost your way ..get out the guidebook. In this case..it's the constitution. Time for reading history and discovering just what we want from that document.

While I didn't like the 'tone' of Andrew's line of questioning to Kerry (it was a bit OTT) I admire the passion that drove it.
Andrew made it clear that he had three questions to ask & Kerry was happy to answer them so why the manhandling? Someone cut Andrew's mic off at the third question..that's fine but why did the guards then grab him by the arms & try to physically move him away from where he was standing??? Kerry didn't even have a chance to answer...& he actually wanted to.
Those guards had no right to put their hands on that student at that point.
He was animated & obviously passionate about getting some answers but when did that become a crime??
The only civil disobedience I saw was after the guards had wrongly started manhandling him. I think Andrew reacted appropriately at that point.
Politicians get away with what they've been getting away with for years because of apathy & indifference from the people they are supposed to serve & represent. Nobody really holds anyone accountable anymore.
Andrew was simply sharing his frustration over that simple fact.
Why hasn't Bush been impeached?...why aren't the Democrats holding him accountable? Why didn't Kerry fight the 2004 election results?
I liked Andrews spirit & wish Kerry had been given the opportunity to answer..I like him too.
This country is too hung up on proprietry & political correctness to ever get down to the nuts & bolts of issues. There's an invisible wall between politicians & the people. You can hold all the stale polite Q & A's you want but until people like Andrew get their questions answered honestly & without restrictions, politicians will go on their merry way doing as they please & nothing will ever get fixed.

As I stated, there are several versions of the video. On one from a different angle, you could hear someone tell Andrew that he could ask ONE question to which Kerry said he would answer (after he bullied his way up to the front) Andrew clearly stated that he was going to ask several and then addressed the audience before asking the questions. He was trying to take the stage away from Kerry at that point. His mic was turned off after he used expletive words. There is a guy in a suit up against the wall that motions for the security when Andrew starts flailing about. I believe that they were only going to escort him out until he exibited hostility. I'm okay with that because no one knew what his intentions were or if he was armed. I think we can all appreciate his right to free speech, but he over-stepped his rights when he wanted to be in charge after he claimed "Kerry had his 2 hours". It didn't matter WHAT he had to say about Bush or the voting or whatever. He disrupted a peaceful assembly. He bullied his way to the front of the line infringing on the rights of those in front of him. He compromised the safety of everyone in the room. And now we know he had an agenda, planning the hostility all along.

:yeahthat:

Thank you for articulating what I was trying to get across. My post above was kind of all over the place. I totally agree with your point of view and that wall is very present.

Here is another side to the story. Now, I wasn't there, so I'm relying on reports such as the one posted here, and now this one..I just came across today. What really happened? I'm getting two different accounts..and I not being an eyewitness need to discern out what the truth is here. I say this, because this is a very important incident. When it was reported the way it was earlier by station 10..I thought, okay, this guy planned it. He was arrested for disrupting a peaceful assembly and resisting arrest. Thats' where I got my idea it was "civil disobedience". I used the analogy of nuns deliberately getting arrested by breaking the law to stay a certain distance away from "no trespassing" barricades..while protesting nuclear arms. They wanted to be arrested. No doubt.
Today..here's the other POV. Reading this link from a progressive news source..I get the other side. The truth probably lays somewhere in between. But, maybe not. Tasers are mean and cruel. I remember when the riot police would spray protesters with water hoses. I lived through the protest years. I would be scared to death to protest today.

I meant he was tasered for resisting arrest. If he had gone along peacefully, he would not have been tasered. But it does bring to mind Rosa Parks...and deliberately breaking the law. Would Rosa have been tasered to give up her seat..or does is tasering only done after resisting arrest? What's the protocol with tasers and enforcing the law?
Looks like we have two issues going on here..Freedom of Speech, and Police Brutality?

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0231.html

Amen...sister...

Great point...I guess today Rosa Parks would have been tasered...the sad thing is that people would find a way to defend it.

It is obvious that people only see and hear what they want to. Why do we have laws anyway if we always have an excuse why we should break them?
As the wife of a former police officer, I know first hand how dangerous an irratic person that is resisting can be. My husband was in several dangerous situations that called for use of force. One time in particular the resisting person was unarmed, but in the struggle my husband's leg snapped, leaving him immobile. Without the use of a taser, his only choice was to use his pepper spray, even while knowing the close proximity would affect his own vision and breathing. As you can guess, the perp claimed he used excessive force and brutality. Go figure...

There are a broad range of people that will never accept direction, rules or submit to authority. It is a shame how disrespectful society can be to those that risk their lives on a daily basis. :no:

By the looks of the audience laughing and calling Andrew an idiot in the video, they don't seem too surprised at his treatment. In addition, it sounds like the girl who is screaming is actually one who is filming the events. Perhaps she got a few extra bucks for adding the theatrics?

I think we are all guilty of finding information that substantiates our already settled upon point of view, so go_noles06. I appreciated the perspective of someone who is directly connected to someone who has been in the position to enforce the law. I think it is a scary world we live in. On the one hand, many feel like our rights are being threatened every day, but then we also live in a different world than 30, 20, even 10 yrs ago.

Yes, I agree that people see what they want to see. The principle underlying that is called confirmation bias. It is when we refuse to look at evidence that opposes our line of thinking. Will people be 100% objective all of the time? No, of course not. But, that does not mean we should discount the rights of anyone because they disagree with us. It seems so opportunistic to hold a particular "group" to one standard while not the same for the others. Sadly, we often do that.

As for law enforcement, I agree with that statement to an extent. I have family members who work in different jobs dealing with Law and enforcement of it. They tell me all the time about stories that confirm your perspective and the opposite. As with everything in life, there are good and bad people in every profession. If someone has been discriminated against by the law or the victim of excessive force (honestly) I could understand why that person who doubt and no longer have faith in law enforcement.

At the same time, I don't think you should generalize that behavior to all of the wonderful women and men in law enforcement who do their jobs correctly.

So, you are right, it is about our percieved reality and life experience that will shape our view of the world and everyone in it. Still, I believe in the right of the people to be empowered and question their government. To hold it accountable for injustices or issues that need to be resolved. That is accomplished by a freedom of speech that allows ideas to flow back and forth as well as civil disobedience.

I think we all agree, regardless of party, that the constitution
affords us liberties not present in non-democratic countries. It is our protection against abuse by the state. I just read this article in a UK Guardian paper...and I have to admit, the world is a frightening place today, but are we willing to give up our rights to be safe?http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html

Well....I'd prefer freedom and maintaining the rights we do have, personally. National security SHOULD NOT mean needing to slowly erode the rights that were set forth by the constitution. However, different things like gun control make us realize that sometimes things do need to be reinterpreted to bring the constitution to a 2007 world.

Follow up article. Just in case you are interested:

http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/283492.html

TASER INCIDENT
UF police cleared in 'Don't Tase me, Bro' case
University of Florida cops were exonerated in the stunning of a student. The student may face charges.
Posted on Thu, Oct. 25, 2007Digg del.icio.us AIM reprint print email
By ROBERTO SANTIAGO
rsantiago@MiamiHerald.com



University of Florida student Andrew Meyer struggles with University Police as officers try to remove him from a question and answer session with Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in Gainesville.
Video | 'Don't Tase me, Bro!'
Andrew Meyer, the University of Florida student who was Tasered by campus police in September, may have staged the disturbance in an effort to disrupt a political forum at the Gainesville campus, a state police report concludes.

The report from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, released Wednesday by the university, cleared UF police of wrongdoing in subduing Meyer, 21.

Meyer, of Weston, was subdued with a Taser after he resisted arrest during a speech by 2004 Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Sen. John Kerry on Sept. 17.

Meyer, whose cry of ''Don't Tase me bro'!'' made him a cause célèbre on the Internet, declined to comment Wednesday. He has been charged with disrupting a public event and resisting arrest. The state attorney's office has not yet decided whether to prosecute.

His attorney, Robert Griscti, told The Miami Herald his client was not grandstanding.

``I think the suggestion is that he is looking for publicity when in fact everything that has happened is just the reverse.''

During the forum, Meyer peppered Kerry with questions and refused repeated requests to leave the microphone after his allotted time was up. He had asked Kerry about impeaching President George Bush, why he didn't challenge the 2004 election results and whether he and Bush were in the secret Skull and Bones society as undergraduates at Yale University.

WOULDN'T LEAVE

FDLE said in its report that police use of the Taser was appropriate because Meyer refused police orders to leave the campus auditorium. Meyer clenched a chair to keep police from removing him.

The Taser was the safest way to remove him without harming Meyer or others, the report concluded.

''While I am pleased that the FDLE review is complete, we still have work to do on a separate front,'' University of Florida President Bernie Machen wrote in a statement.

``As an academic institution, it is our responsibility to continually review -- and improve-- how we foster an open environment that is also safe for our everchanging campus community.''

In the 17-page summary of the report, FDLE said it spoke with several witnesses who said that days before the event Meyer vowed to put on ''a show'' at the Kerry event.

According to the report, during a Sept. 11 Gators for Rudy [Giuliani] rally, Meyer got into an argument with another student and told a friend that ``if he liked what he had seen that he should go to the Kerry speech and he would really see a show.''

In addition, the report said that after his arrest, when Meyer was out of view of the cameras, he told officers that they did not do anything wrong and then asked ``if cameras will be at the jail.''

THOROUGH PROBE

The FDLE report included interviews with witnesses, university employees, and video footage to make the determination that police acted properly, according to the summary.

On his website, www.theandrewmeyer.com, Meyer offered no statement but sought contributions to his legal defense fund.

Griscti said that although he still has to review the full 300-page report, he dismissed statements that police claim Meyer made while in police custody.

The university released only a 17-page summary on Wednesday.

''He was in the custody of police officers without anyone around him,'' Griscti said.

He also said that Meyer, a former honors student at Cypress Bay High School, is doing OK and focusing on his classes.

Whether Meyer will face criminal charges for resisting arrest and causing a disturbance will be determined in the next few days, officials said.

''It's still under review at the state attorney's office on whether criminal charges are going to be filed,'' said Spencer Mann, spokesman for Gainesville's state attorney's office.

While students at the university staged protests against the Tasering the day after it happened, students yesterday said they've had some time to reconsider whether campus police violated Meyer's right to free speech.

''A lot of people who protested obviously didn't care that much about it or they'd be out here today,'' Chris Mueller, a UF physics major, said Wednesday.

''I know I definitely feel differently than when I first saw the YouTube videos,'' he said, adding that he now thinks the officers did the right thing.

Gwen Kaster, a UF religion major, agreed.

''They should have beat him with some batons while they were at it,'' Kaster said.

ACLU DEMURS

Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, who read the FDLE report and saw the footage on youtube.com, said Meyer's arrest and Tasering were a sad statement on how heated political discourse is being discouraged on college campuses.

''Universities are the place for untidy, boisterous, rude, and offensive political debate to take place,'' said Simon, adding that Meyer should have been left alone to make his statements and ask his ''untidy'' questions, especially since Kerry appeared ready to answer them.

Simon also dismissed the findings of the FDLE report.

''When you have one Florida law enforcement agency investigating another Florida law enforcement agency, the conclusions are predictable,'' Simon said.

Miami Herald staff writer Diana Moskovitz and Kim Wilmath of the Independent Florida Alligator contributed to this report