Shouting teen shot with stun gun, dies next day

[b0mbrman]

Well that's a sensationalist title...He was shot with the stun gun for "[becoming] combative," not for shouting

Anyway, sucks that he died...

Cheers!

 

[pontifex]

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said. you misunderstood what i said and assumed i made a flaw. i believe i said several times that i understood what you were saying but that it had nothign to do with what i was talking about.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said.

Case closed.

Here's a hint for the future: if you frequently find that people "misunderstand" you, it's possible that you're just not very good at relaying your ideas to others. You can't call people's reading comprehension into question if you don't leave them much to work with in the first place.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said.

Case closed.

Here's a hint for the future: if you frequently find that people "misunderstand" you, it's possible that you're just not very good at relaying your ideas to others. You can't call people's reading comprehension into question if you don't leave them much to work with in the first place.

sorry, everyone else seemed to understand what i was saying.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said.

Case closed.

Here's a hint for the future: if you frequently find that people "misunderstand" you, it's possible that you're just not very good at relaying your ideas to others. You can't call people's reading comprehension into question if you don't leave them much to work with in the first place.

sorry, everyone else seemed to understand what i was saying.

Waggy, myself, and several others didn't (forget their names; don't feel like looking). People only jumped on board after you explained, explained, and re-explained. Even after all that, you refuse to acknowledge that, perhaps, you communicated your original thought rather poorly. With you, it always has been and always will be someone else's fault... whether we're talking about this, your career situation, etc. The responsibility is never on you, is it. (<-- period, not a question mark)

 

[shoRunner]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: pontifex
are you a police officer? were you there? from the article, it sounds to me they had every reason to do it.

Were you there jack@ss. Quote from the article

Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative, according to the statement. Officers fired the stun gun at him after he ignored their warnings, then fired again when he continued struggling, police said.

Several points. One there was more than one officer there. Two there is no mention that they tried to restrain him. And guess what, they are paid to do a job that may cause them at times to get into a physical altercation. They are trained for this. When he became combative they take him down and handcuff him. Now he's no threat to anyone. And if your afraid he'll mess up a squad car, you call the wagon. To use a taser without trying to restrain him is neglience and they should be tried for manslaughter. Next you'll be telling me its ok for a police officer to beat the crap out of a 5 year because he dropped a piece of bubble gum paper. No mention of any weapon at all in this case and they used a taser, no justication for that all, none. And by the way, my uncle has been a sergeant at the state pen for 25 years. I have a good friend who I still keep in contact with, is a state trooper. And two guys who I grew with but don't see much at all anymore, one became a sergeant for the state boys and the other became a detective. So I know lil about what they should be doing. So now you can stfu.

QFT

since when is a 17yr old carrying a book, too much of a threat for a police officer to walk over and throw some handcuffs on. ESPECIALLY if there were multiple police. I have yet to see a teenager that when being "combative" was truely a threat to 1 police officer let alone 2 or 3.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said.

Case closed.

Here's a hint for the future: if you frequently find that people "misunderstand" you, it's possible that you're just not very good at relaying your ideas to others. You can't call people's reading comprehension into question if you don't leave them much to work with in the first place.

sorry, everyone else seemed to understand what i was saying.

Waggy, myself, and several others didn't (forget their names; don't feel like looking). People only jumped on board after you explained, explained, and re-explained. Even after all that, you refuse to acknowledge that, perhaps, you communicated your original thought rather poorly. With you, it always has been and always will be someone else's fault... whether we're talking about this, your career situation, etc. The responsibility is never on you, is it. (<-- period, not a question mark)

right, because its not possible that you have no clue what you're talking about.
i'm glad you know me so well. over an internet forum. you'll have to remind me where i stated that my career situation was someone else's fault. i think i;ve even made a post once about regretting not going to college.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Your personality gets in the way of sound logic and reasoning. Case in point, you had a number of people earlier pointing out a serious flaw in a statement you made, and you absolutely refused to even consider that it might be true. You marry your ideas and refuse to consider any other possibilities, as if opening your mind - even just a bit - might cause your universe to crumble around you. This is a recurring theme in virtually all of your posts. Another good example would be any one of your "I hate my job" threads. You simply do not listen or attempt to comprehend anything that conflicts with any preconceived notions you may have. You're a broken record. You are as inflexible as anyone else on this board when it comes to looking at an issue from someone else's perspective.

your case in point is invalid because there was no flaw in what i said.

Case closed.

Here's a hint for the future: if you frequently find that people "misunderstand" you, it's possible that you're just not very good at relaying your ideas to others. You can't call people's reading comprehension into question if you don't leave them much to work with in the first place.

sorry, everyone else seemed to understand what i was saying.

Waggy, myself, and several others didn't (forget their names; don't feel like looking). People only jumped on board after you explained, explained, and re-explained. Even after all that, you refuse to acknowledge that, perhaps, you communicated your original thought rather poorly. With you, it always has been and always will be someone else's fault... whether we're talking about this, your career situation, etc. The responsibility is never on you, is it. (<-- period, not a question mark)

right, because its not possible that you have no clue what you're talking about.
i'm glad you know me so well. over an internet forum. you'll have to remind me where i stated that my career situation was someone else's fault. i think i;ve even made a post once about regretting not going to college.

Oh I don't think I know you well at all, beyond the fact that you're an extremely passive aggressive individual whose sole outlet appears to be ATOT.

And like I said... when numerous people appear "clueless" with regard to a statement you've made, then maybe... just maybe... they're not the problem...

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77


Oh I don't think I know you well at all, beyond the fact that you're an extremely passive aggressive individual whose sole outlet appears to be ATOT.

And like I said... when numerous people appear "clueless" with regard to a statement you've made, then maybe... just maybe... they're not the problem...

so why do you care about me and what I do or don't do so much? what does it matter that my only outlet is ATOT, whatever that means.

 

[swtethan]

tazer from siphon filter > *

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77


Oh I don't think I know you well at all, beyond the fact that you're an extremely passive aggressive individual whose sole outlet appears to be ATOT.

And like I said... when numerous people appear "clueless" with regard to a statement you've made, then maybe... just maybe... they're not the problem...

so why do you care about me and what I do or don't do so much? what does it matter that my only outlet is ATOT, whatever that means.

I'm bored and getting paid to shrink you.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77


Oh I don't think I know you well at all, beyond the fact that you're an extremely passive aggressive individual whose sole outlet appears to be ATOT.

And like I said... when numerous people appear "clueless" with regard to a statement you've made, then maybe... just maybe... they're not the problem...

so why do you care about me and what I do or don't do so much? what does it matter that my only outlet is ATOT, whatever that means.

I'm bored and getting paid to shrink you.

i hope you're getting paid a lot.
although i didn't think shrinks were there to insult people, but whatever works. 🙂

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Jahee

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Jahee
Hmm, i think that this maybe should be the first course of action, there was only 2 police, im a bit divided on this but i dont think the first action towoards him should have been the tasers, was he that much of a raving lunatic? that one officer could have tackled him and the other cuffed him? if i was a cop then i would rather give the kid a couple bruises than an electric shock... Then again i do realise i wasnt there so i cant really comment...

The problem is that stun guns are so effective that hardened criminals who have experienced them once will literally give up rather than endure them again.

There is no reason for police officers to take unnecessary risks when they can use stun guns to achieve the same purpose with no risk.

While i do see your point of view, i do think the fact that 2 officers using a stun gun on a "130 lb 17 year old" had an element of them wanting to try out their new "toys". Although like i said before i dont know the exact situation so i cant really comment.

yeap. they had them for 5 months.


i still wonder why they were even bothering the kid.

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Tasers are billed as being a nonlethal alternative. The problem with this is that they ARE lethal in a significant number of cases. Police departments choose to ignore this and continue to use them as if they were nonlethal (meaning, liberally).

yeap

disturbing the peace?
if some wackjob was outside my house or business yelling i want jesus, i'd call the police too.

perhaps. but is it worthy of arresting the guy? worth of sending out 6 officers?

he was yelling in the street. I think the cops over-reacted on this.

They warned him, then shot him... No overreaction. If you ignore the police and get hurt, it is your fault.

Then I guess the question is, would you mind the police shooting a person under the same circumstances with a gun? Both are only rarely lethal.

 

[IEC]

This is why you need to take a bad guy down Chuck Norris style. Nothing is as non-lethal as a highly-skilled martial artist 😉

 

[oCxTiTaN]

You know, when I don't know exactly what a word means, I look it up to make sure I do.

Again, "being combative towards police" does not indicate that he attempted to attack a cop or anything, it just means he was belligerent and ready to fight, which could also mean that he was trying to defend himself, rather than being physically threatening toward the cops.

Everyone tries to support the police and immediately assume that whatever they did was justified and the "offender" deserved what happened. No, we weren't there, but you weren't either and this seems totally unjustified and a case of brute force. What really matters is what witnesses say about the incident, a neutral party, and since the "offender" can't exactly defend himself, that's who we need to believe.

 

[fitzov]

What does "I want Satan." get you? The shotgun?

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: fitzov
What does "I want Satan." get you? The shotgun?

LOL
That ain't right, this is a serious thread. 🙂

 

[s0ssos]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Aharami
still. thats just lazy policing. they should only use stun guns when they cant subdue the person physically.

😉

Nope it's smart policing - the cops are protecting themselves.

wow, you seem so sure of yourself.
i should send some police officers over to your house. and see how you respond then

 

[s0ssos]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Obviously you've never been involved with the cops.

Anyways this is pretty sad. But according to Amnesty International there have been like 153 deaths from taser guns in the past few years.

American police consistently stand out as the absolute worst among first world countries.

I'm quite amazed at the sheep here though. Its amazing how blindingly cooperative some of you people are.

153 Deaths from how many uses and how does that compare to deaths with all other apprehension methods (by hand, billy clubs, guns drawn, pepper spray mace) and compare that to officer deaths using the same apprenhension methods.

The fact that American officers are worst among first world countries could it be related to the fact that Americans are among the most selfish, self-serving, egocentric, self-entitled people in the first world.

Hardly sheep - but it's also amazing how combative some of you people are (see previous paragraph).

wow, you continue to impress me. i mean, you just gave a perfect description of yourself. right?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: 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.

you should read the article before making yourself look stupid.
they didn't "tase him to the point it killed him." they tased him twice, which as far as i know, onl-y lasts for a few seconds. someone correct me if i'm wrong. he died the next day.

unless we got the autopsy report, we don't know he actually died from being tased. it could be a number of things.

:roll:
What part of "THERE WAS NO FVCKING REASON TO USE A TASER ON HIM" do you not understand?

What part of "THERE WAS NO FVCKING REASON FOR THE KID TO IGNORE THE COPS" do you not understand?

If Tasers are so dangerous, why do so many officers take a ride before they carry one?

Originally posted by: oCxTiTaN
You know, when I don't know exactly what a word means, I look it up to make sure I do.

Again, "being combative towards police" does not indicate that he attempted to attack a cop or anything, it just means he was belligerent and ready to fight, which could also mean that he was trying to defend himself, rather than being physically threatening toward the cops.

Everyone tries to support the police and immediately assume that whatever they did was justified and the "offender" deserved what happened. No, we weren't there, but you weren't either and this seems totally unjustified and a case of brute force. What really matters is what witnesses say about the incident, a neutral party, and since the "offender" can't exactly defend himself, that's who we need to believe.

Uh, what? Read the first post in the thread.

Witnesses? Neutral against police? Again, read the first reply to this thread.

 

[Dean]

This all comes down to a matter of looking into what reasonable force is and also looking at the perspective of the parties involved.

For all the people here who defend the police action in this case. How would you feel if you had a 17 year old brother, who suffers from a mental handicap, weighing all of 130 lbs, being beaten and electrocuted by 6 Police officers? All for yelling and waving a bible?

You call throw all the scenario's you want, but the police are trained for hand to hand combat and should have easily restrained him by hand. To me this all comes down to the police not wanting to get their uniforms or hands dirty. None of them have any business being police officers. They should have protected that boy from harms way, not inflicted it on him. It is nothing but over zealousness compounded by an us against them attitude.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Dean
This all comes down to a matter of looking into what reasonable force is and also looking at the perspective of the parties involved.

For all the people here who defend the police action in this case. How would you feel if you had a 17 year old brother, who suffers from a mental handicap, weighing all of 130 lbs, being beaten and electrocuted by 6 Police officers? All for yelling and waving a bible?

You call throw all the scenario's you want, but the police are trained for hand to hand combat and should have easily restrained him by hand. To me this all comes down to the police not wanting to get their uniforms or hands dirty. None of them have any business being police officers. They should have protected that boy from harms way, not inflicted it on him. It is nothing but over zealousness compounded by an us against them attitude.

He could have taken pills to keep his problems under control... if someone is yelling on your street, you will call the police to take care of them. They were doing their job.

 

[NanoStuff]

I want a chicken burger but I'm not parading around the street yelling like a maniac. The kid needed to learn himself some self control. Fortunately for him, his problems are over.

 

[s0ssos]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Dean
This all comes down to a matter of looking into what reasonable force is and also looking at the perspective of the parties involved.

For all the people here who defend the police action in this case. How would you feel if you had a 17 year old brother, who suffers from a mental handicap, weighing all of 130 lbs, being beaten and electrocuted by 6 Police officers? All for yelling and waving a bible?

You call throw all the scenario's you want, but the police are trained for hand to hand combat and should have easily restrained him by hand. To me this all comes down to the police not wanting to get their uniforms or hands dirty. None of them have any business being police officers. They should have protected that boy from harms way, not inflicted it on him. It is nothing but over zealousness compounded by an us against them attitude.

He could have taken pills to keep his problems under control... if someone is yelling on your street, you will call the police to take care of them. They were doing their job.

yup, that's what we'll say if you ever get a mental illness.
actually, probably if anything were to happen to you. it's your fault, right?

 

[PrelateBishop]

I find some of the replies in this thread insightful, some amusing, but most completely lacking in critical thinking. Where any of you actually there? Do any of you have any clue what the actual circumstances regarding this incident were? I didn't think so, but so many of you are willing to make a lightning-quick rush to judgement.

For all we know this kid was 6'4" and weighed 250 lbs. For all we know this kid made furtive gestures that could easily interpreted as hostile. For all we know this kid could have said/done any one of a million different things that prompted the officers' response. For all we know it was simply a bad decision compounded by an unfortunate death.

Why are most so quick to accept what The Press prints as gospel? The fact of the matter is that none of us knows ALL of the relevant facts in this case. I personally would like to think that those charged with our safety should be given the benefit of the doubt.

As an aside, I have been Tased and pepper sprayed. Man, let me ride the lighting any day...5 seconds and it's over, whereas pepper spray had effects lasting more than a day.