"We spent $2,158," Why not go do everything for *free*, and save money in the future for not being trapped to antivirus subscriptions?
When you grow up, and start having to work with groups of people, you will realize the value of having a multiple points of contact for some things. 2k is nothing to know that if this kid is sick, dies, is unreachable or just moves on that the person who comes in after him or subs for him will be able to get support if something goes wrong without having to scour the kids notes on which version of which beta open source project he compiled on each system.
I used to do some work for a university that decided to go the free route to fix a problem. The only real problem with it was, only one person in the entire university knew everything about the free route implementation. If he was absent, any problems that went outside the standard scope that the lower admins were involved with went unanswered until he came back. On the other hand, any of the paid solutions we had at least had an 800 number for support.
In fact, an excellent example of this can be found with the phone bricking updates. Despite warnings before the update came out that unlocking your phone may damage it, despite the warnings when you download the update that if you've unlocked your phone, the update may brick it, despite the warning before you install the update that if you've unlocked the phone you may brick it, people still unlocked their phones and installed the update and then blamed Apple when their phone broke.
Your movies aren't already ripped into 20 different formats and stored on your in home wireless server? Then what the hell are you doing playing on slashdot, get moving man!
Yeah, selected by 13% or less of the population. That's not going to happen in a union with a competitive election.
You just keep telling yourself that. What's that saying? Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first?
No shit, Sherlock. Why would a union be interested in losing a high level union position? If your old man and the company want him to be salaried management, then promote him to a salaried management position. It's really not that hard.
So the company needs to create a second redundant position to fill to promote one of it's workers? And somehow you think this is working for the benefit of the workers?
they've fooled far to many Americans into thinking that standing up for themselves is a bad thing and that unions, regulations, lawsuits need to be eliminated. They're pissing on your head and telling you it's raining. Selling you a high priced shit sandwich and telling you how great it tastes.
The people that stand up for themselves don't need unions. Hence standing up for themselves. All a union is, is a corporation which sells labor, nothing more nothing less. Pretending that a mob has any interests except it's own is the same as pretending that a corporation is out to do something for the good of humanity rather than to make money.
You elect the president too, look where that got half the country. If you think the union leaders have anything but their own best interests at heart you are sadly mistaken. As long as your interests align with theirs, the union will be great for you. As soon as they don't however, you're fucked. As an example, my father works in a union shop. His position is essentially a management position, but unlike all the other management positions in the company, it's not salaried. It's an hourly, union dues paying position. For the last 15 years, both the company and the people who have filled that position (2 others before my father) have been trying to convert the position to a salaried management position. The union has fought and successfully prevented this every single time. Why? Because it's the highest paid union position in the company, and converting to management would mean it's no longer a union position and a loss of a significant chunk of dues. No other reason exists for the union to oppose such a move. My father has been fighting the union on this for years, and was fighting them before this position because their wage negotiations were holding back his departments raises.
For comparison, were to to be sustaining yourself and your family without capitalism but instead through your own sweat and blood, you would find yourself up at 5 AM and working until 8 or 9PM leaving a grand total of 8 hours with which you could sleep. 1/2 my waking hours vs all my waking hours to avoid starvation? I'll take capitalism thank you.
The rich keep getting richer because you can always move up. The poor however, are just as poor as they always were. $0 yearly income is $0 no matter where you go. The problem is multi-fold but first and foremost it's that people's definitions of poor keep changing. Years ago poor meant your family lived in a single bedroom 400 sq ft apartment with a shared bathroom and laundry facility, ate beans and rice for food had no car, no cable, no phone, no fancy electronics and sure as hell didn't have access to this thing called the internet. By comparison, when I was "poor" a few years back (going by actual poverty numbers, and certainly going by considering income under 30k lower class) I had a car, a cell phone, 2 computers, high speed internet, 2 TVs, a PS2, a gamecube, a 1,050 sq ft townhome shared with one roomate and had steak for dinner twice a month (on top of normal meals like roasts and pastas and fajitas etc). True, I didn't have money to spend on movies each week and toys all the time, and if a medical emergency came up, boy was I fucked, but I'll take modern poverty over the poverty of 50 years ago any day.
Still we try to convince poor people that they need to buy consumer crap. Even the most well meaning people hurt the poor when they use consumer crap and material goods access as a measure of poverty. All it does is convince these people that what they need isn't food or medical care to not be poor, but fancy cars and the latest and greatest video games.
Truth be told, I would have loved to have an hour or two to fix a problem for my customers, but where I worked it was mostly walk in/walk out service, which meant that I had at most 30 minutes before I had to move on to the next customer, and when it came to software troubleshooting, that was barely enough time to get started. I was more than happy to spend the time with any customer that was willing to wait for real solutions, everyone else typically got a reformat.
I'm not trying to defend the state of things, just state why it is in many shops. Good, thorough service takes a long time (relatively speaking) and a lot of people don't want to wait or don't want to answer your questions about the problem (whether it's because they're in a hurry or just think you should know everything already). It's part of the reason why I got out of shop work and did field work instead. Counterintuitively, when they paid me by the hour, they understood the problem could take an hour or more to fix, and were surprisingly more willing to spend time with me than when they paid me a flat rate (or nothing as the case may be)
The reason that reformat is done on a regular basis is that really fixing the problem (and explaining how it happened and setting things up to keep it from happening again) takes far longer to do, and usualy doesn't help keep the customer from coming back with the same problem. Even worse is, in my experience, most people aren't interested in their computer being fixed, they're interested in it working, which are two very different things. Doing a format and install does many things:
It means EVERY customer gets their computer back in 2 hours. Since the process is almost entirely automated, I can take in 100 machines a day and have them all done by the end of an 8 hour day. $20000 = happy tech. By comparison, let's say I really work at fixing the machine. Research the problem, clean up the files, double check the work, set up some safeguards. Let's be charitable and say I do all of this in only 30 minutes per machine. That means in 8 hours I do 16 machines. $3200 $20000 = sad tech. Even worse, both sets of customers will be back in 3 months because instead of virus.exe they installed thisisnotavirusreally.exe, but with the first set, I've made more money for the same result.
It means I don't have people bitching at me because I can't fix their computer RIGHT NOW. There are too many people who want their shit fixed now, and to hell with anyone else, and god forbid you tell them to wait their turn, they will eviscerate you.
It lets you quickly eliminate any stupid things your customer might have done without having to ask them if they did anything stupid, have them deny it, and waste your time solving an unsolvable problem because you took them at their word.
There are some customers who do want their stuff fixed, and are interested in why it broke and what not to do in the future. For those people they get their computer fixed, everyone else gets a working computer, and everyone is happy.
If the taser will do the job better and faster then the gun is not required for the situation. The first rule of gun usage is that if you draw your gun, it's because whatever you are drawing on needs to die. If you don't intend to kill, you shouldn't draw a gun. Like I said, by definition, a taser will always have a lower level of force usage than a gun.
If the situation calls for a gun, then no other tool will fit the bill. If you can solve the situation without a gun, then you didn't need the gun in the first place. By definition, taser's will ALWAYS have loose ROE compared to guns.
Then you need to speak with the people you associate with about your expectations of privacy. It's not facebook's fault your friends are violating your privacy.
When I say ubuntu isn't working with my sound card, I mean no sound at all. XP's generic sound drivers are enough to at least get sound out of my soundcard. Same with vista. You can deny it all you want, but it's simple things like this that kill linux uptake. When I did SuSE a few years ago, it was my ethernet card that wouldn't work. Linux desperately needs some generic drivers that are good enough to get BASIC functionality out of common hardware, even if any advanced features aren't supported.
For what it's worth, Ubuntu still doesn't work with my sound card. I was able to get it to work once by mucking around with turning things on and off until it worked, but I then had to reinstall (64 bit doesn't like 32 bit programs) and I can't remember or find the right combination of things to turn on and off again. And it's not like Audigy cards are that uncommon and yes, I've searched the ubuntu forums, and yes there are people with similar problems, and yes, I've tried those and they didn't work (it seems to vary from person to person what works and what doesn't).
Don't get me wrong, it's still installed and I'm still using it but this is something simple that would turn a hell of a lot of people off. The controls all look the same, but the station wagon's controls are all consistant. The tanks vary from tank to tank.
Because of course, every person in the world knows that Course VI refers to an MIT course right? And of course everything printed on T-Shirts is true, which is how you can tell that the guy next to me really is stupid, that my penis is legendary, and that I'm a member of SWAT.
NO people should not have to be afraid of scaring other people.
Just a small nitpick, but almost every state in the US has a law in the vien of "Going armed to the terror of the people" which basicaly states that exercising your constitutional rights can be a crime if your intent appears to be to scare people (or if you scare enough old ladies). Remember that part of the job of the police is to keep the peace. Scarring people (especially large numbers of people) is not keeping the peace.
I guess I just don't see why something should be done though. It's each individual bill payer's choice as to what they buy, and whether the cable company is making $20 off it or $EleventyBillion seems rather irellevant. It's not a crime in this country to make money so why should it be a crime to make money off of other people's wilful, voluntary surrender?
As always though, the answer is then, don't buy it. Don't sue them into submission, just don't buy it. Cable TV is certainly not something anyone NEEDS, and if they aren't offering what you want, then why are you giving them money?
I guess I just don't see the taser use being over the top. Of the options availible, the way he was thrashing and fighting, especialy the way he was doing it in bursts where he would seem to finaly cooperate and then go back to fighting with all his strength, I certainly wouldn't want to try most of the holds I know to get him to stop. Too much of a risk that once he was in that hold, he'd do something stupid and break or dislocate something, then not only do you have him being a drama queen, but you also have lasting injury on top of it. The nice thing about the taser is it does exactly what you want (to stun him into compliance) without a risk of severe bodily harm. Certainly his risk of death by taser is many times lower than risk of injury with holds the way he was thrashing about, and a lower risk of bodily harm from open or closed hand strikes to try and stun him.
The other option I suppose is OC, but with that many officers on the ground and the crowd gathering around, OC runs too high of a risk of injury to someone else as well as the kid.
Yes, I agree they could have continued wrestling him, but I think it was far more appropriate to stun him to end the conflict quickly rather than prolong it. Personaly I feel there would have been too much risk of injruy to prolong that conflict.
I'm glad you think so, but honestly, when was the last time you saw a video posted online with the headline "Cop does picture perfect takedown" and you thought to yourself "That was a perfectly reasonable display of force"? The fact of the matter is, we are programed to reject violence in any form and police takedowns and restraints are always violence, your first reaction is (and should be) abhorrance.
Anyone trained in self-defense knows ways of restraining an opponent without causing severe pain, and a properly trained police officer should know dozens of them.
Anyone trained in self defense also knows the following:
1) The longer any fight continues, the more likely someone is to get seriously hurt. 2) No matter how many picture perfect practices you've done of any particular move or combinations thereof, when the fists start flying, theory goes out the window. 3) Even the simplest and safest of moves can cause severe injury or death if applied in the wrong spot or at the wrong time. 4) No one who doesn't want to be restrained or held is going to coperate with you to ensure that your holds don't harm them, and them twisting in one direction while you twist in the other is a great way you break something.
Using a taser in this situation is not just ludicrously overkill - it should be a criminal offense.
Actually, I thought it was a pretty good response. They tried walking him peacefuly out the door, he fought back. They tried wrestling him to the ground and restraining him and he continued to fight back. They tried rolling him over and cuffing him and he continued to fight back. You'll notice they couldn't maintain control over his hands, you'll also notice that each of those officers was armed. The longer they fight with him on the ground, the more likely someone will get hurt, or in a worst case scenario, that he will get a hold of one of their guns. They needed to get him restrained and under control quickly, and he was absolutely refusing to cooperate, the taser was applied like a stun gun, which means it's localized pain rather than a full body shock , and it was used exactly as it should have been, in a short burst to shock him into cooperating so they could properly cuff and restrain him. You'll notice after that shock, it's all over. His cuffed, gets up under his own power and they walk him out.
When you see five officers - or however many there were holding that kid - unable to properly restrain him or walk him out, you know that they're all absolutely incompetent.
This kid looked to be about 6' and maybe 175lbs or so. Get one of your friends who's built like this, and then get 3 or 4 of your buddies and a pair of handcuffs. Now, try and arrest your friend and do it all without hurting him. No weapons, no blows, and no holds that cause pain. You will find that the only point that you can get the cuffs on your friend is when he stops fighting with all his might because he's afraid that something is going to break or dislocate. That is how retraints and compliance holds work, on fear (and application) of serious and severe pain and injury.
Slashdot Mirror
"We spent $2,158," Why not go do everything for *free*, and save money in the future for not being trapped to antivirus subscriptions?
When you grow up, and start having to work with groups of people, you will realize the value of having a multiple points of contact for some things. 2k is nothing to know that if this kid is sick, dies, is unreachable or just moves on that the person who comes in after him or subs for him will be able to get support if something goes wrong without having to scour the kids notes on which version of which beta open source project he compiled on each system.
I used to do some work for a university that decided to go the free route to fix a problem. The only real problem with it was, only one person in the entire university knew everything about the free route implementation. If he was absent, any problems that went outside the standard scope that the lower admins were involved with went unanswered until he came back. On the other hand, any of the paid solutions we had at least had an 800 number for support.
In fact, an excellent example of this can be found with the phone bricking updates. Despite warnings before the update came out that unlocking your phone may damage it, despite the warnings when you download the update that if you've unlocked your phone, the update may brick it, despite the warning before you install the update that if you've unlocked the phone you may brick it, people still unlocked their phones and installed the update and then blamed Apple when their phone broke.
The prices do seem to be roughly in line with similar computers. The comparison made at the keynote was to the Sony TZ series.
Your movies aren't already ripped into 20 different formats and stored on your in home wireless server? Then what the hell are you doing playing on slashdot, get moving man!
Yeah, selected by 13% or less of the population. That's not going to happen in a union with a competitive election.
You just keep telling yourself that. What's that saying? Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up first?
No shit, Sherlock. Why would a union be interested in losing a high level union position? If your old man and the company want him to be salaried management, then promote him to a salaried management position. It's really not that hard.
So the company needs to create a second redundant position to fill to promote one of it's workers? And somehow you think this is working for the benefit of the workers?
they've fooled far to many Americans into thinking that standing up for themselves is a bad thing and that unions, regulations, lawsuits need to be eliminated. They're pissing on your head and telling you it's raining. Selling you a high priced shit sandwich and telling you how great it tastes.
The people that stand up for themselves don't need unions. Hence standing up for themselves. All a union is, is a corporation which sells labor, nothing more nothing less. Pretending that a mob has any interests except it's own is the same as pretending that a corporation is out to do something for the good of humanity rather than to make money.
You elect the president too, look where that got half the country. If you think the union leaders have anything but their own best interests at heart you are sadly mistaken. As long as your interests align with theirs, the union will be great for you. As soon as they don't however, you're fucked. As an example, my father works in a union shop. His position is essentially a management position, but unlike all the other management positions in the company, it's not salaried. It's an hourly, union dues paying position. For the last 15 years, both the company and the people who have filled that position (2 others before my father) have been trying to convert the position to a salaried management position. The union has fought and successfully prevented this every single time. Why? Because it's the highest paid union position in the company, and converting to management would mean it's no longer a union position and a loss of a significant chunk of dues. No other reason exists for the union to oppose such a move. My father has been fighting the union on this for years, and was fighting them before this position because their wage negotiations were holding back his departments raises.
For comparison, were to to be sustaining yourself and your family without capitalism but instead through your own sweat and blood, you would find yourself up at 5 AM and working until 8 or 9PM leaving a grand total of 8 hours with which you could sleep. 1/2 my waking hours vs all my waking hours to avoid starvation? I'll take capitalism thank you.
The rich keep getting richer because you can always move up. The poor however, are just as poor as they always were. $0 yearly income is $0 no matter where you go. The problem is multi-fold but first and foremost it's that people's definitions of poor keep changing. Years ago poor meant your family lived in a single bedroom 400 sq ft apartment with a shared bathroom and laundry facility, ate beans and rice for food had no car, no cable, no phone, no fancy electronics and sure as hell didn't have access to this thing called the internet. By comparison, when I was "poor" a few years back (going by actual poverty numbers, and certainly going by considering income under 30k lower class) I had a car, a cell phone, 2 computers, high speed internet, 2 TVs, a PS2, a gamecube, a 1,050 sq ft townhome shared with one roomate and had steak for dinner twice a month (on top of normal meals like roasts and pastas and fajitas etc). True, I didn't have money to spend on movies each week and toys all the time, and if a medical emergency came up, boy was I fucked, but I'll take modern poverty over the poverty of 50 years ago any day.
Still we try to convince poor people that they need to buy consumer crap. Even the most well meaning people hurt the poor when they use consumer crap and material goods access as a measure of poverty. All it does is convince these people that what they need isn't food or medical care to not be poor, but fancy cars and the latest and greatest video games.
You will always be shit upon by people more powerful than you because you are one small voice that noone hears.
People more powerful than you like the union leaders?
I've never needed to decrypt a VCR tape.
You never bough a VHS movie after the 1980's? Because I'm sure you've heard of macrovision before...
Truth be told, I would have loved to have an hour or two to fix a problem for my customers, but where I worked it was mostly walk in/walk out service, which meant that I had at most 30 minutes before I had to move on to the next customer, and when it came to software troubleshooting, that was barely enough time to get started. I was more than happy to spend the time with any customer that was willing to wait for real solutions, everyone else typically got a reformat.
I'm not trying to defend the state of things, just state why it is in many shops. Good, thorough service takes a long time (relatively speaking) and a lot of people don't want to wait or don't want to answer your questions about the problem (whether it's because they're in a hurry or just think you should know everything already). It's part of the reason why I got out of shop work and did field work instead. Counterintuitively, when they paid me by the hour, they understood the problem could take an hour or more to fix, and were surprisingly more willing to spend time with me than when they paid me a flat rate (or nothing as the case may be)
The reason that reformat is done on a regular basis is that really fixing the problem (and explaining how it happened and setting things up to keep it from happening again) takes far longer to do, and usualy doesn't help keep the customer from coming back with the same problem. Even worse is, in my experience, most people aren't interested in their computer being fixed, they're interested in it working, which are two very different things. Doing a format and install does many things:
It means EVERY customer gets their computer back in 2 hours. Since the process is almost entirely automated, I can take in 100 machines a day and have them all done by the end of an 8 hour day. $20000 = happy tech. By comparison, let's say I really work at fixing the machine. Research the problem, clean up the files, double check the work, set up some safeguards. Let's be charitable and say I do all of this in only 30 minutes per machine. That means in 8 hours I do 16 machines. $3200 $20000 = sad tech. Even worse, both sets of customers will be back in 3 months because instead of virus.exe they installed thisisnotavirusreally.exe, but with the first set, I've made more money for the same result.
It means I don't have people bitching at me because I can't fix their computer RIGHT NOW. There are too many people who want their shit fixed now, and to hell with anyone else, and god forbid you tell them to wait their turn, they will eviscerate you.
It lets you quickly eliminate any stupid things your customer might have done without having to ask them if they did anything stupid, have them deny it, and waste your time solving an unsolvable problem because you took them at their word.
There are some customers who do want their stuff fixed, and are interested in why it broke and what not to do in the future. For those people they get their computer fixed, everyone else gets a working computer, and everyone is happy.
If the taser will do the job better and faster then the gun is not required for the situation. The first rule of gun usage is that if you draw your gun, it's because whatever you are drawing on needs to die. If you don't intend to kill, you shouldn't draw a gun. Like I said, by definition, a taser will always have a lower level of force usage than a gun.
If the situation calls for a gun, then no other tool will fit the bill. If you can solve the situation without a gun, then you didn't need the gun in the first place. By definition, taser's will ALWAYS have loose ROE compared to guns.
Then you need to speak with the people you associate with about your expectations of privacy. It's not facebook's fault your friends are violating your privacy.
When I say ubuntu isn't working with my sound card, I mean no sound at all. XP's generic sound drivers are enough to at least get sound out of my soundcard. Same with vista. You can deny it all you want, but it's simple things like this that kill linux uptake. When I did SuSE a few years ago, it was my ethernet card that wouldn't work. Linux desperately needs some generic drivers that are good enough to get BASIC functionality out of common hardware, even if any advanced features aren't supported.
For what it's worth, Ubuntu still doesn't work with my sound card. I was able to get it to work once by mucking around with turning things on and off until it worked, but I then had to reinstall (64 bit doesn't like 32 bit programs) and I can't remember or find the right combination of things to turn on and off again. And it's not like Audigy cards are that uncommon and yes, I've searched the ubuntu forums, and yes there are people with similar problems, and yes, I've tried those and they didn't work (it seems to vary from person to person what works and what doesn't).
Don't get me wrong, it's still installed and I'm still using it but this is something simple that would turn a hell of a lot of people off. The controls all look the same, but the station wagon's controls are all consistant. The tanks vary from tank to tank.
In your case, it would most likely be attributed to the fact that the gasoline will burn first before the fire starts to consume your clothes and you.
It doesn't count when you work at MIT
Because of course, every person in the world knows that Course VI refers to an MIT course right? And of course everything printed on T-Shirts is true, which is how you can tell that the guy next to me really is stupid, that my penis is legendary, and that I'm a member of SWAT.
NO people should not have to be afraid of scaring other people.
Just a small nitpick, but almost every state in the US has a law in the vien of "Going armed to the terror of the people" which basicaly states that exercising your constitutional rights can be a crime if your intent appears to be to scare people (or if you scare enough old ladies). Remember that part of the job of the police is to keep the peace. Scarring people (especially large numbers of people) is not keeping the peace.
I guess I just don't see why something should be done though. It's each individual bill payer's choice as to what they buy, and whether the cable company is making $20 off it or $EleventyBillion seems rather irellevant. It's not a crime in this country to make money so why should it be a crime to make money off of other people's wilful, voluntary surrender?
As always though, the answer is then, don't buy it. Don't sue them into submission, just don't buy it. Cable TV is certainly not something anyone NEEDS, and if they aren't offering what you want, then why are you giving them money?
I guess I just don't see the taser use being over the top. Of the options availible, the way he was thrashing and fighting, especialy the way he was doing it in bursts where he would seem to finaly cooperate and then go back to fighting with all his strength, I certainly wouldn't want to try most of the holds I know to get him to stop. Too much of a risk that once he was in that hold, he'd do something stupid and break or dislocate something, then not only do you have him being a drama queen, but you also have lasting injury on top of it. The nice thing about the taser is it does exactly what you want (to stun him into compliance) without a risk of severe bodily harm. Certainly his risk of death by taser is many times lower than risk of injury with holds the way he was thrashing about, and a lower risk of bodily harm from open or closed hand strikes to try and stun him.
The other option I suppose is OC, but with that many officers on the ground and the crowd gathering around, OC runs too high of a risk of injury to someone else as well as the kid.
Yes, I agree they could have continued wrestling him, but I think it was far more appropriate to stun him to end the conflict quickly rather than prolong it. Personaly I feel there would have been too much risk of injruy to prolong that conflict.
That is ignorant bullshit.
I'm glad you think so, but honestly, when was the last time you saw a video posted online with the headline "Cop does picture perfect takedown" and you thought to yourself "That was a perfectly reasonable display of force"? The fact of the matter is, we are programed to reject violence in any form and police takedowns and restraints are always violence, your first reaction is (and should be) abhorrance.
Anyone trained in self-defense knows ways of restraining an opponent without causing severe pain, and a properly trained police officer should know dozens of them.
Anyone trained in self defense also knows the following:
1) The longer any fight continues, the more likely someone is to get seriously hurt.
2) No matter how many picture perfect practices you've done of any particular move or combinations thereof, when the fists start flying, theory goes out the window.
3) Even the simplest and safest of moves can cause severe injury or death if applied in the wrong spot or at the wrong time.
4) No one who doesn't want to be restrained or held is going to coperate with you to ensure that your holds don't harm them, and them twisting in one direction while you twist in the other is a great way you break something.
Using a taser in this situation is not just ludicrously overkill - it should be a criminal offense.
Actually, I thought it was a pretty good response. They tried walking him peacefuly out the door, he fought back. They tried wrestling him to the ground and restraining him and he continued to fight back. They tried rolling him over and cuffing him and he continued to fight back. You'll notice they couldn't maintain control over his hands, you'll also notice that each of those officers was armed. The longer they fight with him on the ground, the more likely someone will get hurt, or in a worst case scenario, that he will get a hold of one of their guns. They needed to get him restrained and under control quickly, and he was absolutely refusing to cooperate, the taser was applied like a stun gun, which means it's localized pain rather than a full body shock , and it was used exactly as it should have been, in a short burst to shock him into cooperating so they could properly cuff and restrain him. You'll notice after that shock, it's all over. His cuffed, gets up under his own power and they walk him out.
When you see five officers - or however many there were holding that kid - unable to properly restrain him or walk him out, you know that they're all absolutely incompetent.
This kid looked to be about 6' and maybe 175lbs or so. Get one of your friends who's built like this, and then get 3 or 4 of your buddies and a pair of handcuffs. Now, try and arrest your friend and do it all without hurting him. No weapons, no blows, and no holds that cause pain. You will find that the only point that you can get the cuffs on your friend is when he stops fighting with all his might because he's afraid that something is going to break or dislocate. That is how retraints and compliance holds work, on fear (and application) of serious and severe pain and injury.