As you can see, a taser, and other methods are authorized for static resistance. If the UCLA officers are under a similar policy, then they were in the right. The chart comes from http://www.cpso.pdx.edu/html/forcepolicy.htm.Tasering is very painful in all cases. In at least some cases (I don't know the exact number, but it's safe to assume more than a dozen nationwide), death has resulted.
The officers used a taser to compel a subject to rise, a ludicrous project completely contrary to the proper use of the device. As any properly trained police officer knows, a taser is used to subdue a subject, not to make him mobile. Most if not all tasered subjects are not able to move for at least several minutes after they've been tasered. The whole point of using the weapon is to immobilize a subject so he can be handcuffed.
These keystone cops tasered a handcuffed subject to make him "get up." They're idiots, and they're about to be sued up the ying yang.
Painful, yes. Incapacitating, no, not usually to a healthy young male.
The kid brought it on himself. He was no victim. He could have stopped the tazering at any time, simply by complying with a reasonable request from a uniformed officer of the law.
I'm sure there will be a lawsuit, these days you can sue for anything.
But the kid is no victim. And the FReepers who think he is, in my opinion, have misunderstood the situation completely.
I find it funny when a willful, stubborn child gets zapped over and over again simply because they're trying to be rebellious for no reason.
He managed to make quite a speech after being tasered.
As you can see, a taser, and other methods are authorized for static resistance. If the UCLA officers are under a similar policy, then they were in the right. The chart comes from http://www.cpso.pdx.edu/html/forcepolicy.htm.