A freelance game artist and programmer has designed a video game which explores concerns over the excessive use of force by police.
Jason Rohrer writes in The Escapist that he was moved to create Police Brutality after viewing the famous Don't taze me, bro! incident in which a student was tasered by police while Sen. John Kerry gave a speech at the University of Florida.
Of his game design, Rohrer writes:
The video reminded me of how scary police can be... I'm not suggesting that the UF students should have physically attacked the police. ...Perhaps they should have done some quick, ad hoc organizing. Perhaps they should have collectively stood up to the police in some kind of non-violent, legal way.
Even if the students could organize on the spot, I wasn't sure what the most effective strategy would be. I designed a game to explore the possibilities. Police Brutality is a game about fear, collective motivation, ad hoc organizing, self-sacrifice, and non-violence...
Comments
While I am against police
Then you'd deserve to be
Re: Then you'd deserve to be
Please understand the verbiage in which you are referring. "Excessive force," has a distinct definition in regard to law enforcement and thusly I would advise against casual usage in the lexicon. Police have the right to utilize force when a citizen does not comply with their demands. Similarly, citizens have the right to protest and follow through with legal action at a later date if they believe the orders were in violation of their protected rights as an American. The Taser was utilized, and often is utilized; in order to not only protect the safety of the police officers but the young man as well. Rather than need to inflict the bodily harm of being dragged, bound or wrestled out of the area police used a relatively safe measure in the form of electric shock. That technique is greatly preferable to being hit, struck, pulled, pushed, twisted, doused in chemicals or shot. The police officers in the incident, while frightening for how well they executed their training, acted with a great deal of restraint and level headiness when they proceeded to give the inciter multiple opportunities to cease his actions before they moved to a usually non-lethal form of force. The young man was in violation of the law and was asked to leave, attempts to direct him out failed, and when the decision was made to arrest him he physically resisted officers of the law. And so, with my considerations in mind and while being clear on the scenario, I ask what you would have found to have been a better avenue of action by the involved?
Re: Then you'd deserve to be
So, I take it that it shouldn't be against the law to disrupt someone when he's speaking. That it shouldn't be against the law to do a crime as long as it doesn't directly endanger anyone. That's right, it's okay to steal, vandalize, etc. as long as you don't hurt anybody.
Re: Then you'd deserve to be
Re: Then you'd deserve to be
Re: Then you'd deserve to be
This guy clearly had it coming. They tried to restrain him before they tazed him. He had one cuff on and then he started thrashing around. If a cuff had struck an officer it could have seriously hurt them. Their only other option was to beat the Hell out of the kid and that would have possibly left him with serious damage. They tazed him, turned it off, he was disoriented and was put in the car. He has no serious damage to date, no physical therapy, no scars.
If you want something to fear... Fear the pain ray.
According to Meyer, he
According to Meyer, he admitted he was out of line, and that the officers did nothing wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniersity_of_Florida_Taser_incident#Legal_a...
While the charges put in place seem a little funny, I do agree that he was out of line, and he should have gone with being escorted out. He was obviously attempting to make a point to the listening people, rather than asking a question that he wanted answers to because he wanted more knowledge. He made up his mind on that fact. To support that, he also brought his own camera, and gave it to someone else because he was expecting a fight. He was fighting the officer to make a story, not because he "was innocent".
The officers acted within the law, McGee. That's the bottom line.
---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.
Youve given a bad link. I
Youve given a bad link.
I find police these days to be very lazy, i mean theres about 5 of them holding the guy down and yet they still feel the need to taze him? it just smacks of lazyness to me. He deserved to be carted off if not for the way he acted to get such loving attention from the police for the way he acted when confronted by them but from what I see here and there american police are quite eager to use excessive force.
i dont much care for any kind of police, the way things are these days id be much better off defending myself. Police wont come when you call for help but are always there to tell you what you can't do.
I remember watching the
I remember watching the video many times in a row, trying to get a good mental picture of what happened. I do agree that authority figures like the police can be intimidating, but at the same time it's their job.
I just played the game now, and it's dead easy. Interesting what the result can be, but there are a lot of other factors that need to be considered than just what this game offers. (Then again, it's a game, not exactly a simulation.)
Perhaps they should have collectively stood up to the police in some kind of non-violent, legal way.
The real problem with this is that interfering with the speaker's removal would be illegal as what they were doing was a legal order in the first place. He failed to comply, and was warned multiple times (in the video) that he would be hit with a taser if he did not stop his struggling and comply. He didn't, and as a result he got what he was warned about.
---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians.