http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-uclataser ... tla-news-1

Another article on it. This one mentions the name of the suspect and a few other important details.

what the hell is wrong with people?

cops tell you to leave, you leave.

looked to me like the piece of shit got what he deserved, and the crowd in interering with the police.

it looked to me like at least once the kid started screaming and flailing when the cops were trying to carry him out.

He was leaving. Did you read the articles?

What does this have to do with the fact that the student was from UCLA?

I agree that the student's behavior was immature but in no way do I see how it warranted the kind of force used. The video and the article suggest that he was willing to leave on his own but that he became resistant once the officer took hold of him.

This reminds me of being at a bar, and someone has had too much to drink and is asked to leave, and the guy starts to leave but perhaps is taking too much time to exit. So a bouncer takes hold of him and then the guy flips out.

And then what does the bouncer do? He drags the guy out of the bar so quickly most people don't even notice what happened. Which is what I think the officers should have done in this case, once they decided to go with the physical approach.

Pozzo, this is what I mean. You reading things into the situation after seeing what apparently is poor quality video and reading a very short article by some guy who thinks a stun gun and tazer are the same thing.

This is very dangerous thinking. You really have to be there to know what really happened because one small detail changes everything.

The article says "A UCLA police officer shocked a student with a stun gun at a campus library after he refused repeated requests to show student identification and wouldn't leave, police said".

Where does it say he was willing to leave on his own but became resistant after officers took hold of him? Its says he refused to show ID, police tried to esscort him out, he encouraged others to join his resistance (which is illegal), then they tazed him when a crowd started to gather. If they tazed him to stop him from further inciting the crowd, then they are well within their rights.

As I said, one small detail changes everything and since we weren't there, we shouldnt try to overanalyze the thing.