[BMXman]

Apparently citizens haven't accepted this policy, hence the fact that it's a news item, and the fact that there is a little bit of outrage that 4 cops tasered an unarmed man to death 30 seconds after walking into the room with him.

Does that get into the little reptilian center in your brain where "thought" occurs?

yeah yeah...they'll all be outraged for a few days then totally forget about as they always do...then when it happens again they'll do the same thing all over again...like I said stop bitching here and do something about it....you don't want cops to have tasers then take the steps necessary to remove them from the police force!

I also find it funny how now one ever comments about how tasers have diffused a potentially dangerous situation and saved someone from possible serious injury of even death...nope just the incidents that get filmed ever make it into the public eye...D

Oh insults...way to make this personal...lol

 

[RenegadeRick]

....you don't want cops to have tasers then take the steps necessary to remove them from the police force!

It's not that I don't think they should have them, they probably should. But they should be used properly. As much as I dislike rules and regulations, this seems like a case where some national guidelines may be appropriate. Of course, said guidelines would only restrict the law and (possibly) protect the citizenry, so I am all for it.

At this point, since determination of appropriate usage is handled at a local level, the blue shield (that Manimal insists doesn't exist) will obviously protect their own. Who wants to bring charges against the guy you were out having beers with the other night?

I also find it funny how now one ever comments about how tasers have diffused a potentially dangerous situation and saved someone from possible serious injury of even death...nope just the incidents that get filmed ever make it into the public eye...D

Please do us a favor and bring them to our attention. I can't wait to hear about Manimal's first use. I am sure it will be totally appropriate.

I still question the watered down civilian version. Shouldn't someone under attack be entitled to a reasonable defense? If they used it in an apparently inappropriate situation I am sure they police wouldn't charge them for it. After all, it is reasonable to expect that civilians would get the exact same consideration that Johny Law does.

 

[manimal]

Please do us a favor and bring them to our attention. I can't wait to hear about Manimal's first use. I am sure it will be totally appropriate.

i was hoping you'd come to my city so i could test it out

I still question the watered down civilian version. Shouldn't someone under attack be entitled to a reasonable defense? If they used it in an apparently inappropriate situation I am sure they police wouldn't charge them for it. After all, it is reasonable to expect that civilians would get the exact same consideration that Johny Law does.

people under attack ARE entitled to a reasonable defense...in most states anyway, they're called concealed carry laws.

and "after all..." civilians don't get the same consideration as johny law when it comes to use of force because civilians aren't tasked with the apprehension of law breakers. civilians can only use force when threatened with bodily harm, LEO's can use force to effect an arrest if necessary.

 

[RenegadeRick]

i was hoping you'd come to my city so i could test it out

Just like a kid with a new toy for Christmas, eh?
You are getting them for Christmas, aintcha?

and "after all..." civilians don't get the same consideration as johny law when it comes to use of force because civilians aren't tasked with the apprehension of law breakers. civilians can only use force when threatened with bodily harm, LEO's can use force to effect an arrest if necessary.

Very true. As much as I dislike it, LEOs should be able to use force if necessary. It is this whole "necessary" business that has me concerned, because the stories we keep hearing about are from those that don't seem very much so.

 

[Transcend]

How do you know that this is vast minority?


I don't think any officer would use taser if someone would point gun at him. Anyway making comparison of reality and tv show is usuallly not very good idea. Besides there is a thor shield...

About getting the full story of "random pole": the police also wasn't very happy to return the vid to the owner:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/11/14/bc-taserrelease.html

However, I don't think the problem is in tasers, since its application has some positive aspects.
Problem is with incorrect application of tool such as multiple force application, use of tool on children, elders...
However, if my sources are correct, the biggest problem (besides few trigger happy retards) here is the lack of taser regulations:



Link:

http://www.durhampolice.com/news/pdf/070921_1.pdf

IMO rules should be established before game is played.

How about because you can see what the media does with each and every case they deem "over-the-top". You'd be seeing many, many more of these if that was the case.

And yes, police do use tazers to take down suspects armed with guns.

 

[BMXman]

Please do us a favor and bring them to our attention.

See I thinks that's part of the problem...those cases never make news...people don't go out looking for them. Instead all you hear about are the "controversial" incidents because those grab peoples attention.

Just about 1-2months ago I remember seeing on the news here how the police tased and subdued a person who was holding police off by acting like he had a gun in his jacket pocket. He even pointed it at them. ...but cooler heads prevailed and he was taken into custody without incident...D

 

[bohorec]

How about because you can see what the media does with each and every case they deem "over-the-top". You'd be seeing many, many more of these if that was the case.

And yes, police do use tazers to take down suspects armed with guns.

IMO only the cases supported by camera footages, witness reports or dead people are reported. Anyway I agree that mainstream media prefers covering bad over good news, but if they are bashing police, government, army, etc, for their mistakes I don't see a problem here. In case media would not be able to report such incidents then taser abuse would trully be a minor problem.

As I said there is a thor shield so I don't think it's very smart to use taser on armed people. Besides I don't think that anyone but security personell should be armed in public.

If anyone feels that only good actions of state/police personell should be covered, one should consider establishing new media or moving to China.

 

[syadasti]

Looks like the Brits are going with, "Don't tase me bro!"

http://www.janes.com/news/lawenforcement/pr/pr071011_1_n.shtml

International UN committee questions taser use...

What do you know, taser manufacturer funded evidence doesn't hold water

Tasers a form of torture, says UN
Article from: Agence France-Presse
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22814674-5001028,00.html?from=public_rss

From correspondents in Geneva
November 24, 2007 04:44pm

TASER electronic stun guns are a form of torture that can kill, a UN committee has declared after several recent deaths in North America.

"The use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of torture,'' the UN's Committee against Torture said.

"In certain cases, they can even cause death, as has been shown by reliable studies and recent real-life events,'' the committee of 10 experts said.

Three men, all in their early 20s, were reported to have died in the United States this week, days after a Polish man died at Vancouver airport after being Tasered by Canadian police.

The man, Robert Dziekanski, 40, fell to the ground and died after the police officers piled on top of him.

There have been three deaths in Canada after the use of Tasers over the past five weeks.

The company that makes the weapons has said that similar deaths have been shown by "medical science and forensic analysis'' to be "attributable to other factors and not the low-energy electrical discharge of the Taser".

The UN committee made its comments in recommendations to Portugal, which has bought the newest Taser X26 stun gun for use by police.

Portugal "should consider giving up the use of the Taser X26,'' as its use can have a grave physical and mental impact on those targeted, which violates the UN's Convention against Torture, the experts said.

 

[MikeD]

The UN has a jacked-up definition of torture. Apparently, it's anything that causes someone else pain. That's simply absurd...otherwise, police use torture whenever they handle a noncompliant suspect.

Torture is more usefully defined by its motive and longevity. Prolonged application of pain as punishment. (My definition, not Webster's.) As opposed to application of pain for purposes of immediate compliance to lawful authorities, after which it ceases.

Could you use a taser to torture someone? Hell yes...but you could use a car battery or electric socket to do the same or worse.

All that said, even given the media bias in all this, I'm not opposed to more independent study...if tasers are killing healthy high-school kids, I think police may need to reclassify them in the use-of-force models. Maybe create a new category between non-lethal and lethal force, for use against violently resisting subjects (as opposed to actively resisting subjects, who may not be violent per se).

 

[syadasti]

The UN has a jacked-up definition of torture. Apparently, it's anything that causes someone else pain. That's simply absurd...otherwise, police use torture whenever they handle a noncompliant suspect.

The UN report isn't a small sensational blurb like the article above, so I doubt they phrased like above. The UK LEO's haven't approved the taser either as I noted - they aren't as gullible as we are over here when a manufacturer claims "proof" of safety. Just look at GMOs or any other new technology - we adopt it immediately with little thought - US likes to be guinea pigs vs. the EU which actually takes its time to properly evaluate.

 

[MikeD]

The UN report isn't a small sensational blurb like the article above, so I doubt they phased like above.

hmmmmm.

"The use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of torture,'' the UN's Committee against Torture said.

 

[syadasti]

hmmmmm.

The media likes simple sound bytes and selective quotes. Its not that simple and you know it...

 

[MikeD]

Umm, they're defining torture as 'acute pain.' It may not be a doctrinal dissertation, but it's pretty clear.

 

[syadasti]

Umm, they're defining torture as 'acute pain.' It may not be a doctrinal dissertation, but it's pretty clear.

Oh yeah thats all the committee report said? Committee reports like that are usually just a few pages:huh:

I suppose you think Al Gore said he outright invented the Internet too because people in the media quoted part of his response

Nobody in the media has provided further deals yet - its Monday in AU so that all we got...

 

[Transcend]

Umm, they're defining torture as 'acute pain.' It may not be a doctrinal dissertation, but it's pretty clear.

Shooting someone with 9mm ammunition or beating them into submission with a nightstick is much less painful.

 

[MikeD]

Shooting someone with 9mm ammunition or beating them into submission with a nightstick is much less painful.

Which is obviously why the UN police and protective personnel carry both...it's totally humane.

 

[syadasti]

Which is obviously why the UN police and protective personnel carry both...it's totally humane.

Humor aside like you said it needs further independent study and proper classification rather than believing whatever the manufacturer says to sell them. If they can cause permanent damage and/or death more frequently than originally claimed they shouldn't be used as often as pepper spray.

 

[MMike]

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=84a69ced-ade2-4561-a552-14f29f73293c&k=76379

 

[DaveW]

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=84a69ced-ade2-4561-a552-14f29f73293c&k=76379

Dziekanski arrived at 3:20 p.m. on Oct. 13 and was processed through primary inspection at 4:09 p.m.

According to a timeline issued by CBSA, Dziekanski wasn't again identified until 10:40 p.m., when he tried to exit the CBSA hall.

Hell that's a looong time to be wandering around lost at an airport! No wonder he was looking so distressed!
It's also amazing security didn't pick up the fact he was wandering around the arrivals area for 7 hours!