Don't tase me bro!

[imported_LoKe]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
In the end it would be a non issue if the guy hadn't CHOSEN to be in that situation.

It would not have been an issue if the cop wasn't a moron. The passenger did nothing wrong, and unless you have court documents to backup your claim the he was an accessory, you're wrong.

 

[Modelworks]

I think tasers are a great replacement for what a cop used before, guns.
I do think that cops need to be trained better on the use of a taser and that its not just something to use whenever you get a whim.

The taser companies are trying hard to promote it like its no big deal.
One salesman said it was about as harmful as being hit with a water balloon.
Thats the kind of mindset they are training cops with about tasers.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
In the end it would be a non issue if the guy hadn't CHOSEN to be in that situation.

It would not have been an issue if the cop wasn't a moron. The passenger did nothing wrong, and unless you have court documents to backup your claim the he was an accessory, you're wrong.

Do you have records indicating he wasn't? No. So again....we can agree to disagree.

 

[imported_LoKe]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Thats the kind of mindset they are training cops with about tasers.

No it's not, because you actually have to take a shot with a taser before you can carry one. Same goes with pepper spray/mace, you get it directly in the eyes.

 

[imported_LoKe]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Do you have records indicating he wasn't? No. So again....we can agree to disagree.

You've confirmed my suspicions. You're a dumbass.

 

[compman25]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Here's the thing: Tasers are NOT being used as an alternative to shooting someone, they are being used to subdue anyone who in any way resists. Furthermore, anyone who has any medical condition dealing with electrical signals (anything involving the heart and/or nervous system) is at very high risk of dying.

If you really think that there are not a large number of bad cops (though not necessarily a large percentage), you are a very naive person.

It pains me to think that you'd rather give cops the permission to beat someone, or hell, shoot someone who's resisting or somehow not co-operating. We all know there are bad cops, but personally, I'd rather they use their tasers than their guns.

Look at the John Kerry Tazing, Cops would have never used a Gun in that situation. They wouldn't even draw their Guns in such a situation. There are numerous other video taped examples where Perps were down and pretty much subdued, except they continued to struggle, before they were Tazed. That kind of situation crosses the line from Justifiable Use to Police Brutality at worst or just plain Laziness at best.

So is the cop supposed to just stop wrestling with the perp and let him control the situation? Or should he go all Rodney King on him and beat him to hell with a baton? I think tazing him sounds like a good idea. And there's no such thing as "pretty much subdued". He's either subdued or he's still resisting.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I think tasers are a great replacement for what a cop used before, guns.
I do think that cops need to be trained better on the use of a taser and that its not just something to use whenever you get a whim.

The taser companies are trying hard to promote it like its no big deal.
One salesman said it was about as harmful as being hit with a water balloon.
Thats the kind of mindset they are training cops with about tasers.

All cops have to be tasered to carry a taser...AFAIK...its really not a big deal......

 

[Xavier434]

Here is the bottom line. Even the bad cops can easily be avoided if you do not do anything illegal and you back the hell off if you are involved in any activity/gathering where cops arrive to take control of the situation. It is really really easy to not get involved with the police.

Like I said earlier, it's good that they are investigating the tasers in hopes of lessening unintentional deaths and severe injuries. Removing tasers will not reduce any problems concerning "bad cops". Before tasers it was batons. Beyond that, we all have enough problems to deal with without having to worry about this one. Just don't be a douche and you will never have to worry about this effecting your life.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Here's the thing: Tasers are NOT being used as an alternative to shooting someone, they are being used to subdue anyone who in any way resists. Furthermore, anyone who has any medical condition dealing with electrical signals (anything involving the heart and/or nervous system) is at very high risk of dying.

If you really think that there are not a large number of bad cops (though not necessarily a large percentage), you are a very naive person.

It pains me to think that you'd rather give cops the permission to beat someone, or hell, shoot someone who's resisting or somehow not co-operating. We all know there are bad cops, but personally, I'd rather they use their tasers than their guns.

You re MISSING THE POINT. The police are using their Tasers in situations where a significant amount of force is not needed. The tasers are being used hundreds of thousands of times. People are dying where in the past people were not, do I don't exactly consider this a great advancement.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I think tasers are a great replacement for what a cop used before, guns.
I do think that cops need to be trained better on the use of a taser and that its not just something to use whenever you get a whim.

The taser companies are trying hard to promote it like its no big deal.
One salesman said it was about as harmful as being hit with a water balloon.
Thats the kind of mindset they are training cops with about tasers.

All cops have to be tasered to carry a taser...AFAIK...its really not a big deal......

Depends completely on the departmental regulations. Not all officers have to, but at the very least it's recommended.

 

[AbAbber2k]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Not the same but your argument doesn't hold up...oh it was just speeding so he is not an accessory. Where do you draw the line?

I draw the line when the passenger is an accessory. Seriously, I have to ask again, are you fucking stupid?

we can agree to disagree. But the cop obviously was on my side in this instance. He got tazed or shot.

Uh, no, he's not on your side. The cop was a dumbass and told the passenger to do something then tased him for doing it because he screwed up his words. I'm wondering if you even read the post.

In the end it would be a non issue if the guy hadn't CHOSEN to be in that situation.

I guess you and your friends have never driven 5 over, right? Because that would make you criminals... and you don't associate with criminals right? :roll:

If you're in someone's car, do you watch their speedometer the whole time to make sure they don't break the law? "Hey, buddy, you're in a 50, and you're doing 52. Either slow it down, or pull over and let me out."

Nothing is black and white. There is a reason all criminals aren't sentenced to death and we have a range of punishments for crimes of varying severity. Just like all suspects don't warrant the use of force (lethal or nonlethal).

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Here is the bottom line. Even the bad cops can easily be avoided if you do not do anything illegal and you back the hell off if you are involved in any activity/gathering where cops arrive to take control of the situation. It is really really easy to not get involved with the police.

Like I said earlier, it's good that they are investigating the tasers in hopes of lessening unintentional deaths and severe injuries. Removing tasers will not reduce any problems concerning "bad cops". Before tasers it was batons. Beyond that, we all have enough problems to deal with without having to worry about this one. Just don't be a douche and you will never have to worry about this effecting your life.

What you are saying is "don't do anything that might annoy a cop and you won't die." This way of thinking only suppresses the rights of people. For instance, tasers are heavily used at protests/rallies. In these places it is VERY common for people to get arrested who were merely caught up in it and were doing nothing wrong. Instead of worrying about getting knocked around by a cop and there being essentially no chance of you dying, now there is a significant chance of death.

 

[imported_LoKe]

Originally posted by: AbAbber2k
If you're in someone's car, do you watch their speedometer the whole time to make sure they don't break the law? "Hey, buddy, you're in a 50, and you're doing 52. Either slow it down, or pull over and let me out."

Let's not forget that even if you do ask the guy to slow down and pull over, he's not necessarily going to comply.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
You re MISSING THE POINT. The police are using their Tasers in situations where a significant amount of force is not needed. The tasers are being used hundreds of thousands of times. People are dying where in the past people were not, do I don't exactly consider this a great advancement.

Has there been a single documented incident where a taser was used in a case where the opposing person was fully cooperating? Maybe if people would cooperate more often then there would have been no need to issue tasers to cops in the first place. You don't draw the attention of the police unless you or those who are around you are doing something wrong. If that happens, then just get the hell out of dodge like you are supposed to do.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

What you are saying is "don't do anything that might annoy a cop and you won't die." This way of thinking only suppresses the rights of people. For instance, tasers are heavily used at protests/rallies. In these places it is VERY common for people to get arrested who were merely caught up in it and were doing nothing wrong. Instead of worrying about getting knocked around by a cop and there being essentially no chance of you dying, now there is a significant chance of death.

There are many rights that people have in this world where certain risks are involved. Protesting is legal if you are not breaking any rules. People shouldn't get hurt if said rules are not being broken. Cops always warn people before tasing unless they are directly assaulted. They warn protesters if they are pushing the limits of their rights. If they don't stop there then that is their fault. You can't expect situations involving large masses of people to always end up with perfect execution by the cops. They are human too. They make mistakes and they get punished for them. That's just how it works with or without the tasers. It's best to consider those risks before taking part in those kinds of events and if you do take part, it is best if you understand where the line is drawn and when to leave.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: AbAbber2k

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: LoKe

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Not the same but your argument doesn't hold up...oh it was just speeding so he is not an accessory. Where do you draw the line?

I draw the line when the passenger is an accessory. Seriously, I have to ask again, are you fucking stupid?

we can agree to disagree. But the cop obviously was on my side in this instance. He got tazed or shot.

Uh, no, he's not on your side. The cop was a dumbass and told the passenger to do something then tased him for doing it because he screwed up his words. I'm wondering if you even read the post.

In the end it would be a non issue if the guy hadn't CHOSEN to be in that situation.

I guess you and your friends have never driven 5 over, right? Because that would make you criminals... and you don't associate with criminals right? :roll:

If you're in someone's car, do you watch their speedometer the whole time to make sure they don't break the law? "Hey, buddy, you're in a 50, and you're doing 52. Either slow it down, or pull over and let me out."

Nothing is black and white. There is a reason all criminals aren't sentenced to death and we have a range of punishments for crimes of varying severity. Just like all suspects don't warrant the use of force (lethal or nonlethal).

I do associate with law breakers and I am also a law breaker and I accepted responsiblity for that and the consequences for associating with such individuals. I agree with you for the most part but when mistakes and accidents and the like arise you cannot be surprised.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
You re MISSING THE POINT. The police are using their Tasers in situations where a significant amount of force is not needed. The tasers are being used hundreds of thousands of times. People are dying where in the past people were not, do I don't exactly consider this a great advancement.

Has there been a single documented incident where a taser was used in a case where the opposing person was fully cooperating? Maybe if people would cooperate more often then there would have been no need to issue tasers to cops in the first place. You don't draw the attention of the police unless you or those who are around you are doing something wrong. If that happens, then just get the hell out of dodge like you are supposed to do.

What is fully cooperating? That seems to be entirely up to the officer. Furthermore, you are not always given the chance to cooperate in the first place. The case that Don Vito (or one of the other AT lawyers) was involved with recently had a guy basically jumped with no warning by officers because they thought he was involved with a nearby robbery. I can't recall if he was Tasered or not. Then there was the guy who was Tasered in his own bed. That is just off the top of my head. The situation is not always black and white.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
You re MISSING THE POINT. The police are using their Tasers in situations where a significant amount of force is not needed. The tasers are being used hundreds of thousands of times. People are dying where in the past people were not, do I don't exactly consider this a great advancement.

Has there been a single documented incident where a taser was used in a case where the opposing person was fully cooperating? Maybe if people would cooperate more often then there would have been no need to issue tasers to cops in the first place. You don't draw the attention of the police unless you or those who are around you are doing something wrong. If that happens, then just get the hell out of dodge like you are supposed to do.

What is fully cooperating? That seems to be entirely up to the officer. Furthermore, you are not always given the chance to cooperate in the first place. The case that Don Vito (or one of the other AT lawyers) was involved with recently had a guy basically jumped with no warning by officers because they thought he was involved with a nearby robbery. I can't recall if he was Tasered or not. Then there was the guy who was Tasered in his own bed. That is just off the top of my head. The situation is not always black and white.

It is up the officer. They are given the power for a reason. Yes, there are bad cops. Yes, situations happen involving those bad cops. Most importantly, cops are human and not perfect. Tasers help a lot more than they hurt. The only problem is that you only read about the bad stories especially since this subject matter is currently in the spotlight of the news media. Taking them away is not going to help much of anything. Bad cops will continue to abuse their rights one way or another until they are caught and fired.

In any case, our laws and rights are there to protect us all, but do not let them blind you. Use your best judgment and you will never run into these problems. In this case, if you are at a protest rally and you see it getting out of hand then leave even if you are not doing anything wrong. It's not worth it.

 

[Ruptga]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Another man dies

Amnesty International has reported that, since June 2001, more than 150 people have died in the United States after being subdued with a stun gun. The organization has called for police departments to suspend use of the devices pending study of their possible risks.

So, almost half of the nations law enforcement agencies use tasers. IMO, that's too much potential for abuse. I wonder how many of those 150 who were killed actually needed such draconian action?

So what do you suggest, tell them to club them instead?

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
You re MISSING THE POINT. The police are using their Tasers in situations where a significant amount of force is not needed. The tasers are being used hundreds of thousands of times. People are dying where in the past people were not, do I don't exactly consider this a great advancement.

Has there been a single documented incident where a taser was used in a case where the opposing person was fully cooperating? Maybe if people would cooperate more often then there would have been no need to issue tasers to cops in the first place. You don't draw the attention of the police unless you or those who are around you are doing something wrong. If that happens, then just get the hell out of dodge like you are supposed to do.

What is fully cooperating? That seems to be entirely up to the officer. Furthermore, you are not always given the chance to cooperate in the first place. The case that Don Vito (or one of the other AT lawyers) was involved with recently had a guy basically jumped with no warning by officers because they thought he was involved with a nearby robbery. I can't recall if he was Tasered or not. Then there was the guy who was Tasered in his own bed. That is just off the top of my head. The situation is not always black and white.

It is up the officer. They are given the power for a reason. Yes, there are bad cops. Yes, situations happen involving those bad cops. Most importantly, cops are human and not perfect. Tasers help a lot more than they hurt. The only problem is that you only read about the bad stories especially since this subject matter is currently in the spotlight of the news media. Taking them away is not going to help much of anything. Bad cops will continue to abuse their rights one way or another until they are caught and fired.

In any case, our laws and rights are there to protect us all, but do not let them blind you. Use your best judgment and you will never run into these problems. In this case, if you are at a protest rally and you see it getting out of hand then leave even if you are not doing anything wrong. It's not worth it.

The problem with the "its up to the officer" idea is that there are zero real consequences for an officer killing someone. Has anything even been done with the officer that killed the nephew of one of the ATOT members? More than any other case I have seen in a while that is a clear case of negligence and complete disregard for consequences. As a result, there is no real check on the actions of an officer. An officer should be thinking "is this worth the .001% chance that this will kill the guy." But the average officer is not. This is not an issue of bad vs good cops. It is the average officer who will kill through negligence that I am worried about.

Clearly you have never been near a protest rally. You don't always have the chance. Heck, there were a number of stories of this happening during the LA riots. I CAN'T use my best judgement because what it tells me could very likely get me killed, despite that being the right thing to do.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Another man dies

Amnesty International has reported that, since June 2001, more than 150 people have died in the United States after being subdued with a stun gun. The organization has called for police departments to suspend use of the devices pending study of their possible risks.

So, almost half of the nations law enforcement agencies use tasers. IMO, that's too much potential for abuse. I wonder how many of those 150 who were killed actually needed such draconian action?

So what do you suggest, tell them to club them instead?

There are a large number of effective alternatives for the overwhelming majority of tasering incidences. Tackling the suspect has worked pretty well for a few thousand years. Tasering is on par with clubbing as both are occasionally lethal.

 

[Kadarin]

There's far too much potential for abuse.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Here's a thought. Cooperate with the cops and you can 100% eliminate the risk of death from being tased. Still, I approve the studies of the risks here. The original intent was to give cops a self defense/control device other than their guns and batons which are effective and do less harm.

What about the guy recently who was tased while asleep on his couch?

 

[Ruptga]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Another man dies

Amnesty International has reported that, since June 2001, more than 150 people have died in the United States after being subdued with a stun gun. The organization has called for police departments to suspend use of the devices pending study of their possible risks.

So, almost half of the nations law enforcement agencies use tasers. IMO, that's too much potential for abuse. I wonder how many of those 150 who were killed actually needed such draconian action?

So what do you suggest, tell them to club them instead?

There are a large number of effective alternatives for the overwhelming majority of tasering incidences. Tackling the suspect has worked pretty well for a few thousand years. Tasering is on par with clubbing as both are occasionally lethal.

Ok, how would you like to be the one that gets to wrestle down a 250lb drunk bubba? Batons (police clubs, whatever you call them) and tasers have their place, that said, police are people too, stupid happens. All I really have to say is get over it, this is the best we've got so far.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Another man dies

Amnesty International has reported that, since June 2001, more than 150 people have died in the United States after being subdued with a stun gun. The organization has called for police departments to suspend use of the devices pending study of their possible risks.

So, almost half of the nations law enforcement agencies use tasers. IMO, that's too much potential for abuse. I wonder how many of those 150 who were killed actually needed such draconian action?

So what do you suggest, tell them to club them instead?

There are a large number of effective alternatives for the overwhelming majority of tasering incidences. Tackling the suspect has worked pretty well for a few thousand years. Tasering is on par with clubbing as both are occasionally lethal.

Ok, how would you like to be the one that gets to wrestle down a 250lb drunk bubba? Batons (police clubs, whatever you call them) and tasers have their place, that said, police are people too, stupid happens. All I really have to say is get over it, this is the best we've got so far.

Would I want to? Not really? Would I do it if I was an officer? Hell yes, that is my JOB.


Simply put, the Taser is a tool for police officers, but one that has very lethal consequences. If 150 have died from tasering, would 150 have died (officers or suspects) if the tasers were not used? The answer is no. To me, that indicates that something is wrong in the frequency of use by officers.