We received a direct response from Florida’s Attorney General today. It is more of a blanket response, but here it is:

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum has received your email regarding the arrest of a University of Florida student during a recent event. Attorney General McCollum asked that we respond.

Your comments are indicative of the broad spectrum of public opinion concerning  appropriate government response.  Attorney General McCollum shares your concerns about the duties of our law enforcement authorities,
public officials, and the media to responsibly and ethically balance the vigorous pursuit of truth with individual rights and freedom of speech.

The University of Florida adminstrators have requested that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) conduct a formal  and independent investigation of the actions surrounding the arrest of the student.  If you
would like information regarding the FDLE, their website is:

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/

If you wish to contact FDLE for further  information, you may do so at Post Office Box 1489, Tallahassee, Florida 32302.  The telephone number is (850) 410-7000.

You may also wish to voice your concerns to the Internal Affairs section and/or the head of the law enforcement agency in question.  Part IV of
Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, sets forth the process and requirements pertaining to complaints against law enforcement officers.  You may access that chapter and the Florida Statutes in their entirety in a searchable database online at:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0112/part06.htm&StatuteYear=2006&Title=%2D%3E2006%2D%3EChapter%20112%2D%3EPart%20VI

Thank you for contacting Attorney General McCollum’s Office.
 

What do you think of the e-mail letter?

Advertisements

There is a fantastic article by Howard Ditkoff that looks into the emotions and psychology  of people responding to the Andrew Meyer taser incident.

Howard writes:

What I’ve found most fascinating about the situation are the responses.

Clearly there has been a significant proportion of people that has responded with anger and indignation to what they view as the police using far too much force on Meyer without just cause. Some of those people go as far as to claim that the action was an attempt to deny Andrew Meyer his First Amendment rights and to unfairly and/or illegally suppress his pointed questions about some highly sensitive issues.

On the other hand, many people I have spoken with have defended the police. Even while admitting that their actions may have been rather heavy-handed, they will bring up – and reasonably so – the fact that police officers work in an atmosphere of great danger. Thus, they argue, we need to be sympathetic to the fact that the officers were responding to a person who was in fact resisting arrest, regardless of whether or not the arrest was originally justified or not.

But what is most striking to me is the level of emotion with which I’ve seen people, including myself, respond on both sides of the issue. As the phrase goes “When it’s hysterical, it’s historical,” and I have come to believe that people are reacting to this event based mostly on their own past experiences with authority figures during their development and/or their own coping responses to those experiences.

Read the full article at  Emotional Responses to the Andrew Meyer & John Kerry Incident: A Psychological Study in Issues of Power, Anger and Authority

This is our initial response to a reader. 

I don’t fully agree with the use if disruption to levy our right to free speech. However, it appears the organizers of the event cut the students short from asking their questions. It is also reported that the Dean had the bulk of time to ask questions to Kerry, but the students had less than half that time.

The only reason Meyer ran to the front of the line was to emphasize this, then he went ahead and asked his questions. Kerry was even willing to answer the questions and told the officers to leave Meyer alone. I’m sure if Meyer were permitted to speak as scheduled, where he had to wait his turn, he would have asked his questions without such emotion.

But it all falls back to the point, how far is too far when it comes to police force and brutality? There were 5 or 6 police officers (depending on the report you read). Surely, that many cops could contain and escort him out.

There is an incident in a different state with a David Snyder. He was escorted out of a council city budget meeting, beat, bloodied and arrested. They didn’t use a taser on him and were able to get him outside. However, he protested and tried to resist arrest. He was also denied his right to free speech.

Both these acts, in different locations, signal things to come. They signal our government has turned into a tyranny and that our innate God-given freedoms will be oppressed. Those who oppose or resist will be beaten and made to look like scapegoats in the public’s eye.

Here is another denial of freedom of speech by police officers, this time during a city council budget meeting. The man just wanted more than a minute to express his views and opinions, but he was taken outside, man-handled, beat, bloodied and arrested. They dropped the charges on him, but apparently, he still had to post bail.

Not only will they beat you, they will also steal your money! 

Watch the video below:

UPDATE: Youtube removed the video to censor what really happened.