Recommended Posts
QuoteThe only way tazers will going away is if groups like Amnesty International get their way.
Tazers are and have been the most effective way to deal with non-compliant/resisting suspects.
The deaths associated with tazers can be attributed to the suspects physical condition (or lack thereof), varying types and levels of intoxicants, and other OUTSIDE factors.
These explanations are not acceptable. The taser is sold as a non lethal tool to allow police to placate suspects at lower risk to both parties. Non lethal has a meaning - people don't die. If medical issues means it could be fatal, it can't be used. Cops aren't doctors and are unqualified to make that judgement.
So unless you can remove that risk, you have to treat tasers as pretty far along the escalation scale, short of the firearms. Use the club or mace instead.
----
I'm not with Zippo on the hauling the guy off, however. It sounds like they tolerated a good amount of 'free speech' from the guy before opting to evict him from the assembly. He could have continued that outside the door, with his Harry Potter signs and all.
skycop 0
Absolutely wrong.
They are less lethal not non-lethal, any weapon, even used properly has the possibility of being lethal.
I'm glad someone brought up the use the club or mace argument. If they were striking him with an ASP (collapsible baton) or the PR-24 (baton with handle grip) we would be having the same discussion. The thread title would have been "student beaten with baton" or something along those lines. Strikes with a baton cause injury virtually every time. The recovery time for tazers is much less and there is no permanent injury.
Mace or OC would have cleared half the room as well as MAYBE working on the bad guy. I've seen OC just piss people off more.
The scale (use of force continuum) you are referring to has 4 levels:
Verbal- To persuade
Empty Handed-Seeks compliance with the use of restraint techniques, holds, armbars etc.
Less lethal- met to impede the aggressors actions. With use of less lethal tools or weapons, batons, OC/mace/tazer.
Deadly Force- To stop the aggressors actions to protect life
The tazer falls in the Less than Lethal level. Remember an officer can use one step ahead of the aggressor to prevent injury. Injury can occur to the aggressor or officer at levels above verbal. These levels are universally accepted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police IACP.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
They are less lethal not non-lethal, any weapon, even used properly has the possibility of being lethal.
I'm glad someone brought up the use the club or mace argument. If they were striking him with an ASP (collapsible baton) or the PR-24 (baton with handle grip) we would be having the same discussion. The thread title would have been "student beaten with baton" or something along those lines. Strikes with a baton cause injury virtually every time. The recovery time for tazers is much less and there is no permanent injury.
Mace or OC would have cleared half the room as well as MAYBE working on the bad guy. I've seen OC just piss people off more.
The scale (use of force continuum) you are referring to has 4 levels:
Verbal- To persuade
Empty Handed-Seeks compliance with the use of restraint techniques, holds, armbars etc.
Less lethal- met to impede the aggressors actions. With use of less lethal tools or weapons, batons, OC/mace/tazer.
Deadly Force- To stop the aggressors actions to protect life
The tazer falls in the Less than Lethal level. Remember an officer can use one step ahead of the aggressor to prevent injury. Injury can occur to the aggressor or officer at levels above verbal. These levels are universally accepted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police IACP.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
Zenister 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe taser is a much more humane way to deal with people resisting.
Save the occasional fatality.
They thought the fire hose was a good way to disperse civil rights protesters not long ago. The taser will soon go the way of the fire hose.
I think the rule should be, if you are not holding some sort of weapon (brick or stick included), no taser.
but but.. its Sooooo much easier to train someone to point a tazer and fire than to actually teach them restraint and control techniques...
oh wait.. i keep forgetting we dont want to pay for properly trained LEOs when we can simply issue them tazers instead...
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.
skycop 0
Restraint and control techniques are taught however, outside of a controlled environment they can be less than effective.
I do agree that it becomes easier for an officer to use a tazer than good communication skills. Most medium to larger departments track use of force by officers.
It falls on supervison to track and deal with officers that fall into this catagory.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
I do agree that it becomes easier for an officer to use a tazer than good communication skills. Most medium to larger departments track use of force by officers.
It falls on supervison to track and deal with officers that fall into this catagory.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
Quote
The tazer falls in the Less than Lethal level. Remember an officer can use one step ahead of the aggressor to prevent injury. Injury can occur to the aggressor or officer at levels above verbal. These levels are universally accepted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police IACP.
So are rubber bullets, but that doesn't make it appropriate.
Sorry, there's no justification for using a sometimes lethal weapon on an obnoxious speaker. The person needs to represent at least some threat.
It seems that the best point for the taser is it leaves no annoying evidence of police brutality (save the dead people), unlike the baton, which will leave a mark, but won't kill unless you really wail on the guy. Even Rodney King survived and they were trying to kill him. With the taser, you can always say he was on drugs and have a bad heart and just coincidentally died at the same time.
n23x 0
Face it, Q&A for any speaker provides the possibility that someone is going to ask a question you don't like, or that the question may not be as structured or spoken by a perfectly calm speaker. I will grant that the student seemed riled up, though not to the point that he should have been excused. Read Kerry's response to the situation: that he was attempting to respond to the question when the student was dragged off, and that he was dissatisfied that good strong dialogue was cutoff.
When you become a LEO you need to grow some thick fucking skin. This is not a different time now that 9/11 has passed, just because someone gives you the stink eye or calls you gay (or a bull dyke like the girl cops obviously were) doesn't mean they need to be arrested.
People do have a right to resist if the police are doing something that's out of line, though they might suffer consequences.
To all of the people that suggest that the students speech was out of line, (as somebody suggested before) look at congress.
These cops were far less out of line than that PIG in missouri, but still out of line.
And finally, if the police wrong you, maybe you should wrong them back. 
edited to add: but no disrespect to the hot girl cops in golden that come sauntering into the Ace every night. Ladiesssssssssssss
Quote
I got my black shirt on.
I got my black gloves on.
I got my ski mask on.
This shit's been too long.
I got my twelve gauge sawed off.
I got my headlights turned off.
I'm 'bout to bust some shots off.
I'm 'bout to dust some cops off.
Cop killer, better you than me.
Cop killer, f**k police brutality!
Cop killer, I know your family's grievin'
(f**k 'em)
Cop killer, but tonight we get even.
I got my brain on hype.
Tonight'll be your night.
I got this long-assed knife,
and your neck looks just right.
My adrenaline's pumpin'.
I got my stereo bumpin'.
I'm 'bout to kill me somethin'
A pig stopped me for nuthin'!
Cop killer, better you than me.
Cop killer, f**k police brutality!
Cop killer, I know your mama's grievin'
(f**k her)
Cop killer, but tonight we get even.
Die, die, die pig, die!
F**k the police!
F**k the police!
F**k the police!
F**k the police!
F**k the police!
F**k the police!
F**k the police yeah!
.jim
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
QuotePeople do have a right to resist if the police are doing something that's out of line, though they might suffer consequences.
I used to be that stupid too. Suffer a few of those consequences and you might change your mind.
Cop says Stop and you do not stop, You lose, Plain and simple. Whether you were right or wrong at that moment is irrelevant. Arguing with the Cop will only make it worse for everyone involved.
skycop 0
Ok.
Just don't let facts get in the way. Rubber bullets would not be an appropriate use of force in this situation
.
I knew it would only be a matter of time before somebody envoked Rodney King.......
That WAS a beating, those guys did deserve to go to jail. With that said, if the officers in this situation were thumping this kid with their fists and wailing away then I'd be on your side.
These officers were acting according to their training, as unpleasant as it may be to watch, use of forces seldom are.
Once the kid started pushing, shoving, and flailing his arms he did become a threat, and was dealt with accordingly.
As far as just being obnoxious, once HE made it physical he escalated the situation.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
n23x 0
QuoteI used to be that stupid too.
But no longer?
Agreed, cops have an excess of power over civilians (at least in smaller numbers).
Pigs will unlawfully use that power to attempt to sway matters which don't require their involvement. What we saw in that video blurred the lines between cops and pigs.
.jim
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
skycop 0
WOW,
Need I say more
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
n23x 0
Sorry to hurt your feelings. Unfortunately, increasing corruption from almost all positions of authority (particularly local policing forces) leads to higher disapproval when they do something wrong.
If you are a good cop, be a good cop, and I'll have no reason to have anything but a respectful, polite interaction with you.
If you are a bad cop, I will do my best to take away your job, and any sense of pride and respect you thought you had (or deserved). Fair enough?
If you are a good cop, be a good cop, and I'll have no reason to have anything but a respectful, polite interaction with you.
If you are a bad cop, I will do my best to take away your job, and any sense of pride and respect you thought you had (or deserved). Fair enough?
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
skycop 0
I'm not worried about my feelings getting hurt. If we ever had an interaction it would be based on your actions, my observations, and any other number of factors along with any applicable laws.
Depending on those factors I may be a good cop, a bad cop or something in between (in your eyes). Your thoughts of me would not matter in my decision making process.
This WAS a civil discussion for a long time and thankfully was virtually rant free on all sides.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
Depending on those factors I may be a good cop, a bad cop or something in between (in your eyes). Your thoughts of me would not matter in my decision making process.
This WAS a civil discussion for a long time and thankfully was virtually rant free on all sides.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
willard 0
QuoteSorry, there's no justification for using a sometimes lethal weapon on an obnoxious speaker. The person needs to represent at least some threat.
Agreed 100%. But they weren't using "sometimes lethal" force on an obnoxious speaker. They were using it on someone who had refused to do what a LEO lawfully ordered to do, had swung his arms at them (watch the videos, it's very clear), and had aggressively resisted cooperating in any way with the police.
QuoteOk.
Just don't let facts get in the way.
the fact is, and you can't dispute it, that tasers are not non lethal.
n23x 0
Out of curiousity, why don't you identify your pick for upcoming presidential candidate. I will then find video of your candidate: a.) exceeding the time allotted for them to speak, b.) talking out of turn, and c.) becoming agrivated or excited while speaking.
Do you think I'll find additional video of them being arrested for this action? Do you think the 2 situations should have been handled similarly?
As far as my original post being uncivilized, I was being facetious, as I expect were the people who identified this student as acting in an immature fashion "like all college students act".
.jim
Do you think I'll find additional video of them being arrested for this action? Do you think the 2 situations should have been handled similarly?
As far as my original post being uncivilized, I was being facetious, as I expect were the people who identified this student as acting in an immature fashion "like all college students act".
.jim
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
willard 0
QuoteOut of curiousity, why don't you identify your pick for upcoming presidential candidate. I will then find video of your candidate: a.) exceeding the time allotted for them to speak, b.) talking out of turn, and c.) becoming agrivated or excited while speaking.
Do you think I'll find additional video of them being arrested for this action? Do you think the 2 situations should have been handled similarly?
As far as my original post being uncivilized, I was being facetious, as I expect were the people who identified this student as acting in an immature fashion "like all college students act".
.jim
You can find video of any politician running over their allotted time, etc. But you won't find video of them getting tasered.
Why not?
Simple. This was a Q&A sesion, not a debate. According to reports he had made several outbursts already leading up to his turn at the mic, then tried to take over the session by grandstanding. This wasn't the venue for that, he was told to ask his questions, he decided to instead rant on and on, and he was then escorted away from the mic. When he tried to resist the cops they used what force they felkt they had to use to remove him from the area without harm to themselves or others standing nearby.
When politicians get in an uproar at the mic and are told to tone it down, they do. When they are told that their time is up they may go on for a few more moments but they do stop. They are generally allowed to do so because it is a debate, not a Q&A session.
Debate vs Q&A session. Big difference that this kid obviously couldn't see.
They were cops doing their job the best they could. Not pigs. Good thing you don't live around here.
billvon 3,082
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Good thing you don't live around here.
Your one warning.
Your one warning.
n23x 0
QuoteWhen politicians get in an uproar at the mic and are told to tone it down, they do. When they are told that their time is up they may go on for a few more moments but they do stop. They are generally allowed to do so because it is a debate, not a Q&A session.
Debate vs Q&A session. Big difference...
Not that big of a difference. Nice try though. Regardless, I've seen equivalent outbursts from from congressman, presidential candidates, and even our fearless VP.
Pot meet Kettle? Not according to Willard.
.jim
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
willard 0
I'll try to explain it one more time, a little plainer so you can understand it. I'll even try to use very short words.
Debate: People discussing and telling their views on a subject. Politicians do this all the time. It's their job.
Q&A session: A chance for people to ask questions, not for them to present their views unless asked.
If you can't understand the difference then I don't know what to tell you other than to attend a few of each and try to compare them.
Debate: People discussing and telling their views on a subject. Politicians do this all the time. It's their job.
Q&A session: A chance for people to ask questions, not for them to present their views unless asked.
If you can't understand the difference then I don't know what to tell you other than to attend a few of each and try to compare them.
willard 0
Quote>Good thing you don't live around here.
Your one warning.
For what? Telling some little faggot I don't like the way they refer to cops? Fucking punk can post all day so-called song lyrics about killing cops, call them pigs, etc., but I tell him he's lucky he don't live around here and you blow a gasket.
n23x 0
Oh, I do know the difference, thanks.
You're right, the student does present some of his views as well as the views of some current authors, while structuring a few questions together. What part of that don't you understand?
Further, Kerry's own response to the situation was as follows:
Quote
"I have never had a dialogue end this way. I believe I could have handled the situation without interruption, but I do not know what warnings or other exchanges transpired between the young man and the police prior to his barging to the front of the line and their intervention. I asked the police to allow me to answer the question and was in the process of answering him when he was taken into custody. I was not aware that a taser was used until after I left the building. I hope that neither the student nor any of the police were injured. I regret enormously that a good healthy discussion was interrupted."
So... the speaker, who was holding this Q&A session (which has absolutely zero similarity to a debate with regard to the actions of the participants. according to Willard), had no problem with the student posing the structured question.
Maybe I'm the one that needs to speak a little slower.
.jim
"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC
willard 0
No, you just need to grow up and learn the difference between a debate and a Q&A session.
Maybe when you get into 5th grade you'll learn what that difference is.
Maybe when you get into 5th grade you'll learn what that difference is.
the truth is in the middle somewhere. There have always been limitations on Free speech. I cant yell Fire in a Theatre, I cannot disrupt a Public Assembly. I can walk into City hall and start Screaming. I cant do lots of things. I cant Swear in some Public Places. I cant say Fuck You to a Cop (I found that one out the hard way too), I cant walk into a church and interrupt their services to express my opinion of their religion. There are many, many limitations on Free speech.
In general I have the right to have my voice heard and to say what I believe, but I do not have the right to force that Voice on others.
That is where this guy went astray. He kept going and going long after he was asked to stop. He was attempting to force his voice on others that were not there to hear him.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites