Shouting teen shot with stun gun, dies next day

[waggy]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

I have to mostly agree here. As I said my brother in law is a cop and I have talked very candidly to him about this. I don't believe its the Academy that changes them though - it is the years of arresting people only to see they get out on some stupid technicality. It is the years of having the law and procedure stuffed in their faces by the criminals who are clearly breaking the law, but can't be prosecuted because they are using the law to protect them.

A lot of police officers see the futility in their jobs and this affects them.

not only that but the things people do to each other. i can't imagine having to deal with stuff like that all the time.

you think its bad? try working with DCFS (foster care). you would be amazed what adults (parents, family members etc) do to kids daily.

we did foster care for a few years (wifes parents have done it for 20+ so we fallowed). we have had young girls mollested from nearly birth, kids beat etc.

i can stand what one adult does to another. but what a adult does to a kid is amazing.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

I have to mostly agree here. As I said my brother in law is a cop and I have talked very candidly to him about this. I don't believe its the Academy that changes them though - it is the years of arresting people only to see they get out on some stupid technicality. It is the years of having the law and procedure stuffed in their faces by the criminals who are clearly breaking the law, but can't be prosecuted because they are using the law to protect them.

A lot of police officers see the futility in their jobs and this affects them.

not only that but the things people do to each other. i can't imagine having to deal with stuff like that all the time.

you think its bad? try working with DCFS (foster care). you would be amazed what adults (parents, family members etc) do to kids daily.

we did foster care for a few years (wifes parents have done it for 20+ so we fallowed). we have had young girls mollested from nearly birth, kids beat etc.

i can stand what one adult does to another. but what a adult does to a kid is amazing.

when i said people, i mean all types - adults and children, black, white, hispanic, asian, etc.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

I have to mostly agree here. As I said my brother in law is a cop and I have talked very candidly to him about this. I don't believe its the Academy that changes them though - it is the years of arresting people only to see they get out on some stupid technicality. It is the years of having the law and procedure stuffed in their faces by the criminals who are clearly breaking the law, but can't be prosecuted because they are using the law to protect them.

A lot of police officers see the futility in their jobs and this affects them.

I can definitely see that as a problem :thumbsup:

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Jahee

Originally posted by: shadow9d9


"B F'ing S. We had a situation here a few months ago where state troopers shot and killed an innocent man who was mentally handicapped."

Was he shot by a taser? If not, your whole story is irrelevant.

" In this situation you have cops who couldn't even physically subdue a 130 person? "

Again, if they were following procedure, they were doing their job.. you can't expect them to go against procedure because random guy on the internet disagrees with standard police procedure.

the story isnt irrelevant, its the same hastiness to use excessive force that we're debating

your second comment is a little immature, there are procedures yes but does that mean police should follow them blindly and apply the exact same procedure to all situations?

Umm, a taser is not excessive force... please stop overexaggerating everything. Your "story" compared outright shooting someone with a gun and tasering.. the 2 aren't even CLOSE to the same.

Who said they followed it blindly? If the situation fits protocol, then they responded accordingly... why would anyone assume they didn't? It just happens to be that your opinion disagrees with what they did.. doesn't mean what they did was wrong though... especially if it followed protocol. It made sense to me what they did.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

i'm not trying to be right (yes i know that comment was directed at me because you said it earlier). i was trying to make you understand what i was saying. waggy seems to have got it, but you still don't. besides, you're just as interested in trying to be right as well.

Waggy just got tired of trying to help you understand where you went wrong. We always "got it", though you refused to see the error in the statement you made. People just gave up. Time to move on.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

i'm not trying to be right (yes i know that comment was directed at me because you said it earlier). i was trying to make you understand what i was saying. waggy seems to have got it, but you still don't. besides, you're just as interested in trying to be right as well.

Waggy just got tired of trying to help you understand where you went wrong. We always "got it", though you refused to see the error in the statement you made. People just gave up. Time to move on.

there was no error in my statement, you just have no reading comprehension. no worries though, there's lots of people like that on this forum. 🙂

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: j00fek
another good showing from our pigs we call cops

Boy that's a generalization.

What would you rather they do? The boy was warned before being shot. After the first shot he still didn't calm down so they shot him again. They used a stun gun to try and minimize the damage.

It wasn't the cops fault that the boy died from the stun gun. If anyone it's the boy's or it's Taser's.

What threat did this kid pose?

ZERO.

and you know this how? There is not enough informaiton to assess the threat level (in either direction)....

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
"B F'ing S. We had a situation here a few months ago where state troopers shot and killed an innocent man who was mentally handicapped."

Was he shot by a taser? If not, your whole story is irrelevant.

" In this situation you have cops who couldn't even physically subdue a 130 person? "

Again, if they were following procedure, they were doing their job.. you can't expect them to go against procedure because random guy on the internet disagrees with standard police procedure.

No, it wasn't irrelevant at all. I was addressing your comment that if you ignore the police and then get hurt it's your fault. My story was simply pointing out that that thinking is flawed. As for your second comment, I think the debate here is whether or not these sort of actions are justified regardless of the official procedure (i.e. do procedures need to be changed?).

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm going to pop back in here and offer this up:

I've known a number of people before and after they've joined the police force. There is something about the Academy that changes a person. What were once very friendly, compassionate individuals are now very bitter, sour, elitists. They're still my friends, and I admire the task they've taken on, but for every "pig-hating passive aggressive citizen", there is an elitist police officer poised behind the shield, waiting for an opportunity to prove him right.

The problems between the police and the public are the result of a natural distrust between the two. I would almost say it's a healthy distrust. The fact is, cops need to be kept in check. Another fact is that the public needs to be kept in check. After pondering the story from the OP, I do believe the cops went too far. I'm not going to even try to explain myself. There are too many passionate opinions on the subject, and most people - like I said earlier - are far more interested in being right than they are in seeking the truth.

Carry on.

i'm not trying to be right (yes i know that comment was directed at me because you said it earlier). i was trying to make you understand what i was saying. waggy seems to have got it, but you still don't. besides, you're just as interested in trying to be right as well.

Waggy just got tired of trying to help you understand where you went wrong. We always "got it", though you refused to see the error in the statement you made. People just gave up. Time to move on.

there was no error in my statement, you just have no reading comprehension. no worries though, there's lots of people like that on this forum. 🙂

Bolded to help you work on your own comprehension.

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
No, it wasn't irrelevant at all. I was addressing your comment that if you ignore the police and then get hurt it's your fault. My story was simply pointing out that that thinking is flawed.

I don't believe this thinking is flawed. In the vast majority of the cases, Police do not have to deal with deaf people or mentally disturbed people. We shouldn't alter things to deal with the minority.

This in fact is why I make such a strong case for use of the stun gun. In both cases, the stun gun would likely have brought the situation to a happy (albeit somewhat painful) ending rather than the two deaths.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Thraxen
No, it wasn't irrelevant at all. I was addressing your comment that if you ignore the police and then get hurt it's your fault. My story was simply pointing out that that thinking is flawed.

I don't believe this thinking is flawed. In the vast majority of the cases, Police do not have to deal with deaf people or mentally disturbed people. We shouldn't alter things to deal with the minority.

This in fact is why I make such a strong case for use of the stun gun. In both cases, the stun gun would likely have brought the situation to a happy (albeit somewhat painful) ending rather than the two deaths.

in the one i mentioned with the deaf guy this was on Gauledet university. which is a DEAF college. so yes i expect them alter things.

as a matter of fact after the incident they did. they changed the policy and even hired some cops with hearing impairments to help with the relations with the school.

when in a unique situation you need to change how things are done.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: shadow9d9
"B F'ing S. We had a situation here a few months ago where state troopers shot and killed an innocent man who was mentally handicapped."

Was he shot by a taser? If not, your whole story is irrelevant.

" In this situation you have cops who couldn't even physically subdue a 130 person? "

Again, if they were following procedure, they were doing their job.. you can't expect them to go against procedure because random guy on the internet disagrees with standard police procedure.

No, it wasn't irrelevant at all. I was addressing your comment that if you ignore the police and then get hurt it's your fault. My story was simply pointing out that that thinking is flawed. As for your second comment, I think the debate here is whether or not these sort of actions are justified regardless of the official procedure (i.e. do procedures need to be changed?).

It was completely irrelevant. I said if you get hurt, it is your fault for ignoring the police.. that still is referring to this particular situation and how he inadvertently died. The point that they didn't use excessive force still applies to my response. The fact that he happened to die was still a result of his actions of ignoring the police. My response is the same either way.. whether by excessive or by non excessive force... but since this case is about non excessive force, your comparison makes no sense here.

You might be making the debate about whether a taser is justified.... but it is an utterly silly "debate" to me... I simply responded that the police were doing as ordered.. this isn't some isolated incident... it is just one reported.. it happens all the time, everywhere, every day. So it is nothing new. If it is accepted by the police force as protocol, then that is that.. they did nothing wrong. If you are anti-taser, feel free to argue that you don't like tasers... if you are fine with tasers, you can't make your argument... why? Because these situations happen millions of times a day.. police have to use their instincts and training.. if each of their actions is studied to the nth degree by people unaware of what it is actually like to be in police service, their job would be completely hampered.

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: waggy
in the one i mentioned with the deaf guy this was on Gauledet university. which is a DEAF college. so yes i expect them alter things.

as a matter of fact after the incident they did. they changed the policy and even hired some cops with hearing impairments to help with the relations with the school.

when in a unique situation you need to change how things are done.

On a deaf University, the majority of the people would be deaf so I agree with you. The cops should have assumed he was deaf and operated accordingly.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
It's a tragedy that he died from less than lethal force, but the alternative was to shoot him so he would have died anyway. If you don't want to die, don't fight the cops or anyone else. Your right to live ends when you threaten the safety of another person without just cause.

That is so easy to say, but when you are dealing with someone mentally handicapped, you cannot expect them to take verbal warnings.

It was obvious this kid had issues, the police had him vastly out numbered, tasered him most likely due to him trying to pull away from their grip or flailing his arms. So then they tasered him, which would have knocked him to the ground. They pounce on him, notice he is still struggling, so they taser him again? Why the second time? Because they were pissed off that he was not 100% co-operative. They had him under control, he weighed 130 lbs.

It is simply an abuse of power to the third degree. They had him under control, yet the second taser was somehow necessary. Maybe the like the look of someone convulsing on the ground.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: waggy
in the one i mentioned with the deaf guy this was on Gauledet university. which is a DEAF college. so yes i expect them alter things.

as a matter of fact after the incident they did. they changed the policy and even hired some cops with hearing impairments to help with the relations with the school.

when in a unique situation you need to change how things are done.

On a deaf University, the majority of the people would be deaf so I agree with you. The cops should have assumed he was deaf and operated accordingly.

at this particuler school i would say 98% are deaf. hell they just forced out a new presidant because she was not deaf.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: j00fek
another good showing from our pigs we call cops

BAN! :|

 

[jpeyton]

Anybody else thing today's cops are a bunch of pussies compared to those of yesterday.

If a 17 year old teenager, holding a bible and shouting nonsense, was not cooperating 20 years ago, a couple of officers would have knocked him to the ground and cuffed him.

Now we got trigger-happy pigs with even more toys to deploy. More weapons removes their need to use good judgement. Don't think, just shoot and clean up the mess later.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: j00fek
another good showing from our pigs we call cops

what the fvck are you talking about? it appears they DID NOT use the stun gun hastily.
they used it according to procedure.

Why even use a taser at all? One kid carrying a book, you mean to tell me 2 or 3 of them couldn't wrestle him to the ground without using a gun or taser. Dumb@ss

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Dean

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
It's a tragedy that he died from less than lethal force, but the alternative was to shoot him so he would have died anyway. If you don't want to die, don't fight the cops or anyone else. Your right to live ends when you threaten the safety of another person without just cause.

That is so easy to say, but when you are dealing with someone mentally handicapped, you cannot expect them to take verbal warnings.

It was obvious this kid had issues, the police had him vastly out numbered, tasered him most likely due to him trying to pull away from their grip or flailing his arms. So then they tasered him, which would have knocked him to the ground. They pounce on him, notice he is still struggling, so they taser him again? Why the second time? Because they were pissed off that he was not 100% co-operative. They had him under control, he weighed 130 lbs.

It is simply an abuse of power to the third degree. They had him under control, yet the second taser was somehow necessary. Maybe the like the look of someone convulsing on the ground.

I disagree. First note that I have been in hundreds of situations similar to this one, so I have some idea how it goes down.

Mentally handicapped is secondary to the right of an individual (or police officer) to protect themselves. If they're so bad that they're a danger then they need to be institutionalized: period.

Outnumbered is nice, but not a guarantee. Weight is irrelevant...I can produce a 120lb woman that I guarantee would kill 90% of the people on this board. Struggling is struggling. It's very hard to safely cuff someone who is fighting you - even if they aren't strong, on drugs, or mentally disturbed. Add any of those and it becomes even worse.

I'm not saying they weren't pissed. Without a video I can't guarantee that it was necessary. However, with my experience I will usually come down on the side of the defender in these situations. I stand by my initial post completely.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else thing today's cops are a bunch of pussies compared to those of yesterday.

If a 17 year old teenager, holding a bible and shouting nonsense, was not cooperating 20 years ago, a couple of officers would have knocked him to the ground and cuffed him.

Now we got trigger-happy pigs with even more toys to deploy. More weapons removes their need to use good judgement. Don't think, just shoot and clean up the mess later.

QFT

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Aharami
why use a stun gun? are the cops that out of shape that 2 cant overpower one teenager?

He could have had a gun or a knife. He could have been a street fighter. He could have a black belt in some martial art. He could have HIV or some other blood transferring disease.

Why should the cops find out the hard way?

also its not a cops job to get into a brawl.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else thing today's cops are a bunch of pussies compared to those of yesterday.

If a 17 year old teenager, holding a bible and shouting nonsense, was not cooperating 20 years ago, a couple of officers would have knocked him to the ground and cuffed him.

Now we got trigger-happy pigs with even more toys to deploy. More weapons removes their need to use good judgement. Don't think, just shoot and clean up the mess later.

looks like you and classy are on your deserted island.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else thing today's cops are a bunch of pussies compared to those of yesterday.

If a 17 year old teenager, holding a bible and shouting nonsense, was not cooperating 20 years ago, a couple of officers would have knocked him to the ground and cuffed him.

Now we got trigger-happy pigs with even more toys to deploy. More weapons removes their need to use good judgement. Don't think, just shoot and clean up the mess later.

looks like you and classy are on your deserted island.

Deserted island? Some of you take such moronic stances its absolutley ridiculous. You say I am on a deserted island, but yet you take stance in favor of tasing a guy who was F'in CARRYING A DAMN BOOK, to the point it killed him. In this case, your an idiot.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else thing today's cops are a bunch of pussies compared to those of yesterday.

If a 17 year old teenager, holding a bible and shouting nonsense, was not cooperating 20 years ago, a couple of officers would have knocked him to the ground and cuffed him.

Now we got trigger-happy pigs with even more toys to deploy. More weapons removes their need to use good judgement. Don't think, just shoot and clean up the mess later.

QFT

I second that!

 

[oCxTiTaN]

Is it guilty until proven innocent now? That's what it sounds like you people are trying to say, like this 130lb 5'7" 17-year old KID was a real threat to the number of officers surrounding him.

Like it has been said, if that many officers can't subdue this kid, they need to become rent-a-cops at the local shopping mall or something.

What exactly is combative anyway? In all of the news articles I've read about it, they don't state anything outright, just that he was combative. Hmmm..lemme see here:

com?bat?ive /k?m'bæt?v, 'k?mb?t?v, 'k?m-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhm-bat-iv, kom-buh-tiv, kuhm-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?adjective
ready or inclined to fight; pugnacious:

AND

com·bat·ive (km-btv) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "combative" [P]
adj.

Eager or disposed to fight; belligerent.

By definition, he never technically physically did anything to the cops, and was more than likely demonstrating defense rather than offense and of course the media is going to side with the piggies here, it's not smart to make your police force look bad.