well to me its a 50/50 he was told to get down and he didn't to me the tazer was a bit over the top but it looked like he wasn't letting them cuff him. but that spear hahah

Its simple you listen to what they tell you to do and you wont ride the lighting or get sprayed. He was resisting arrest so the officers had every right to use force.

They barely gave him anytime to get down and the tazer was unnecessary.

SLD wrote They barely gave him anytime to get down and the tazer was unnecessary.

they probably gave him some time to get down cause as you see the police man trying to trip him up to put him on the ground. yea do think the tazer was unnecessary but he was resisting arrest so that's why they used it.

BHOS wrote

SLD wrote They barely gave him anytime to get down and the tazer was unnecessary.

they probably gave him some time to get down cause as you see the police man trying to trip him up to put him on the ground. yea do think the tazer was unnecessary but he was resisting arrest so that's why they used it.

So in America if you don't get on the ground in 10 seconds, you get tazed? They clearly already had him on the ground there was no need for the tazer. The teenager didn't appear to be armed and was already restrained.

SLD wrote

BHOS wrote

SLD wrote They barely gave him anytime to get down and the tazer was unnecessary.

they probably gave him some time to get down cause as you see the police man trying to trip him up to put him on the ground. yea do think the tazer was unnecessary but he was resisting arrest so that's why they used it.

So in America if you don't get on the ground in 10 seconds, you get tazed? They clearly already had him on the ground there was no need for the tazer. The teenager didn't appear to be armed and was already restrained.

it could of been more than ten seconds cause the video didn't show the police grabbing him at the start but it dosent matter if they say get down on the ground and he dosent and hes trying to get them off him and get away then i think its fine for the police to do that. i do agree with the tazer he was on the ground i don't think there was need for it.

BHOS wrote

SLD wrote

BHOS wrote

SLD wrote They barely gave him anytime to get down and the tazer was unnecessary.

they probably gave him some time to get down cause as you see the police man trying to trip him up to put him on the ground. yea do think the tazer was unnecessary but he was resisting arrest so that's why they used it.

So in America if you don't get on the ground in 10 seconds, you get tazed? They clearly already had him on the ground there was no need for the tazer. The teenager didn't appear to be armed and was already restrained.

it could of been more than ten seconds cause the video didn't show the police grabbing him at the start but it dosent matter if they say get down on the ground and he dosent and hes trying to get them off him and get away then i think its fine for the police to do that. i do agree with the tazer he was on the ground i don't think there was need for it.

In the UK the Police will only use a Tazer as a last resort, some police here don't even have Tazers. It also seems that in America they use them on a daily basis even when people don't put up much of a struggle, the police in the States abuse their powers.

WORLDSTAR Lmao he got **** up

The whole football team was just walking by like