Poll: UCLA Student Asking For It or Campus Cops should not have tasered?
- Thread starter sanjuro
- Start date
IMHO - Tazers are for when you want an alternative to deadly force.
If the situation doesn't call for a gun to be drawn - it doesn't call for a tazer.
There are plenty of situations where these 'non-lethal' tactics have been used in-appropriately. There needs to be some serious re-training.
If the situation doesn't call for a gun to be drawn - it doesn't call for a tazer.
There are plenty of situations where these 'non-lethal' tactics have been used in-appropriately. There needs to be some serious re-training.
How can anyone vote both? Are they incapable of forming an opinion?
Uhhh, Slugman, actually no. If a situation calls for a gun, you draw a gun. If it calls for non lethal techniques, that is what you use. Asp (baton), pepper spray, tazer, whatever. Use of force is contingent on subject actions. The subject elevates your use of force options based on his actions, your response is typically based on his actions. At least this is how the use of force continuum is supposed to work. As we see, it doesnt always work that way.
This kid was asking for it, and he got it. Did the security guys over react? Definitely. Could it/should it have been handled differently? H#ll yeah. Now the only question is how much $$ it is going to cost the California taxpayers to atone for the actions of a couple morons.
This kid was asking for it, and he got it. Did the security guys over react? Definitely. Could it/should it have been handled differently? H#ll yeah. Now the only question is how much $$ it is going to cost the California taxpayers to atone for the actions of a couple morons.
My opinion was based on some of the early training/marketing stuff I have seen (old neighbor was a cop). They sold it as a way to stop someone who was attacking you, but the attacker either did not have a weapon or had a weapon that could only be used in close range (knife or bat).
It seems like a great product, but that so many people use it inappropriately because they are lazy.
2 cops couldn't grab this kid and drop him to the ground? and wasn't he hit AFTER he was already on the ground? He was not making any threatening action...
I think the tazer is a great tool for law enforcement, my neighbor had to kill some dude who cornered him b/c the dude was 2x his size... if he had the tazer, the dude would be alive and gotten the medical treatment he needed (he had a mental disorder).
Do we know if the UCLA Cops had guns? I dont want to look at the 9 million other posts...call me lazy...:biggrin:
This is not a zero sum game. I voted both because while I felt the kid was asking to tasered, doing it multiple times seem ridiculous.
Especially after Manimal, a police officer, indicated that they usually taser their arrestees once, then wait for the emt's to remove the barbs.
The kid was getting High In the Library... at least thats the word amongst UCLA peeps, my sister goes there and thats what she told me
Quit posting hearsay, grommet.
They're real cops, so yes.
I voted both and think it's a legitimate choice. The kid was being a dingus...rules is rules, you know. But tazering him multiple times and just using it as a way to hurt the kid until he does what they say is ridiculous. He was asking for something, but got way too much.
Hee hee hee, you said dingus. This marks the first time in my RM history that I have seen the word dingus used! Lets drink to that!
