It's getting out of hand!

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Quote

But, this thread isn't about such situations, it's about unnecessary use of the taser and that in the last 5 years there have been more than 200 deaths associated with the use of the taser.

Between the spasmatic twitching I think I fixed it for ya!

The rest of your post didn't tell me anything i wasn't already aware of when I foolishly signed up to get zapped. TI is hiding the truth and it has been proven.

Glad you enjoy being tasered. What's next on your list of things to do? Electroshock therapy? Best read the very small print before signing away your rights.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[billvon 3,107]

>I have an aversion to dog bites. Does that mean if a cop comes near
> me with a dog i can shoot the dog because I'm afraid of being bit?

If:

a) you were a hemophiliac, and a doctor told you that if you were bitten, you stood a good chance of dying and

b) this particular police precinct has a policy of using their dogs to deal with even minor problems with shoppers

then yes, if a cop confronted you and sic'ed his dog on you, you would be within your rights to kill it.

>But, in the real world, there are those who will always throw a tantrum
>when they can't have their way and there will always be cops and others
>who are a bit quick to tase.

I agree. Reducing both would be a good way to avoid having to make decisions on whether to kill cops (or shoppers, or speeders, or travelers.)

[freethefly 6]

Out of line St.George Mo. cop caught on video cursing, threatening and berating a guy who did nothing wrong. The cop was fired.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMllB-ELrTI

The transcript;
http://policecrimes.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2019

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Maybe in your secret police state where you live -- But in the United States, cussing at or flipping the bird to the police is not subject to arrest.

OBEY CONFORM OBEY


or else

People like this scare the fuck out of me and deserve to live in the country of their dreams..BUT not this country..Could I suggest a nice military dictatorship in South AMerica...

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

and that law has been ruled against...even in fairly violent DWI arrest case of The State of Texas v. DH Misdemeanor DWI - defendant was acquitted of all charges.

Time for you to read your own fine print.
You stated a person could not be arrested for cussing, etc.
I gave you a link-one of many available-that shows you were wrong.
You said nothing of whether the arrest would be upheld.

BTW, how many states have held such laws ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS?

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But, this thread isn't about such situations, it's about unnecessary use of the taser and that in the last 5 years there have been more than 200 deaths associated with the use of the taser.

Between the spasmatic twitching I think I fixed it for ya!

The rest of your post didn't tell me anything i wasn't already aware of when I foolishly signed up to get zapped. TI is hiding the truth and it has been proven.

Glad you enjoy being tasered. What's next on your list of things to do? Electroshock therapy? Best read the very small print before signing away your rights.

Uhhh....I don't remember where I said I enjoyed it. Could you point that out to me?
As I remember it was a very unenjoyable experience.

[KelliJ 0]

Of all the people who post here, Amazon, you are one of my favorites. Every one of your posts is so predictable. Bitch-Whine-Troll
Bitch-Whine-Troll

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

>I have an aversion to dog bites. Does that mean if a cop comes near
> me with a dog i can shoot the dog because I'm afraid of being bit?

If:

a) you were a hemophiliac, and a doctor told you that if you were bitten, you stood a good chance of dying and

b) this particular police precinct has a policy of using their dogs to deal with even minor problems with shoppers

then yes, if a cop confronted you and sic'ed his dog on you, you would be within your rights to kill it.

>But, in the real world, there are those who will always throw a tantrum
>when they can't have their way and there will always be cops and others
>who are a bit quick to tase.

I agree. Reducing both would be a good way to avoid having to make decisions on whether to kill cops (or shoppers, or speeders, or travelers.)

Did you get your law degree from the same school you got your engineering degree?
I seriously hope nobody ever tries to use your logic as a defense for shooting someone.

[Amazon 7]

Hey... I just try to make stupid people THINK....

the erosion of personal rights in this country is appalling to me.... and what is sad are all the right wing fascist fucknuggets who think that is a good thing

I have actually been to police states... not too much fun at all. Well unless you are part of the oppressive group that can get away with anything they like....

[billvon 3,107]

>Did you get your law degree from the same school you got your
>engineering degree?

Nope, don't have one! Oddly, here in the US, juries made of people like me - rather than a panel of lawyers - decide who's guilty or innocent. Strange but true.

[KelliJ 0]

Yes, I am also one who may serve on a jury someday.
And there is no way I would ever accept what you propose as an excuse for shooting a cop.

Now answer this for me. Every time I have ever been pulled over for speeding the officer has always approached my door with his/her hand on their gun. Would you feel justified in shooting them? After all a gunshot is much more deadly than a taser regardless of any heart condition.

[skycop 0]

Quote

no crowd "gathered" in this case for that matter...they KNOW BETTER than to risk arrest these days...in Florida even more so.

WTF? The crowd gathering would be the onlookers who should have otherwise been shopping, until this lady started going off.

Quote

being mad at a store employee or anyone for that matter is not a police matter

Evidently it was enough for an employee to go get the officer.

Quote

until it becomes violent

It's not a very good idea to wait for something to become violent, before taking action. If that were the case we could be just like fireman, sit at the station and wait for something to happen. Sounds great to me, just go pick up the leftovers. Society expects us to prevent as well as stop crimes.
The bottom line is if I was shopping at Best Buy with my four year old (which I did today btw), and somebody starts going ballistic over a dispute, I would want the situation taken care of. I don't want to hear some tool dropping the f-bomb and other things infront of my kid or any other, especially after the cops show-up. If this woman would have acted like an adult we would'nt be having this conversation. Again, my wife works in retail and she takes all kinds of verbal abuse and even sometimes threats. No one should have to put up with that, period. That is what the disorderly conduct statute is for, especially when the behavior happens infront of an officer, I expect them to do something about it.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[shropshire 0]

<>

Hey none of us (I'm sure) envy your career choice and are really thankful for good police officers doing a good job.

But, can not condone inappropriate actions (no one should) and the good ones should come down like a ton of bricks on the bad once - not close ranks or they are just as bad in our eyes.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[normiss 891]

I still don't see a crowd gathering at this incident...people clearly walk right past and continue to enter the store...

The employee called the cop over because the woman left her credit card on the counter and walked away....

Do you also shot people before they get violent? Are you a mind reader???

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Well at least no one will need to worry about you in any future police state..






OBEY CONFORM OBEY

Where did you get the idea that I blindly obey and conform? All I've been saying here is that we don't know everything that happened leading up to the tasering.
Do YOu know what was said? Do YOU know what the issue with her credit card was? Do YOU know whether she threatened the cop or someone else?
I have no idea whether it was justified, I wasn't there and there isn't nearly enough information available on the net to come to a conclusion. Doing so without having all the facts-ALL the facts- including what was said, is stupid.

Is it as stupid as taking a strong position over something you have not seen?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[normiss 891]

I stated it was not grounds for arrest.
I gave you a link - one of many available - that shows you are wrong.

funny thing about law...cops aren't lawyers....they have a very brief period of training for law. That's why we have attornies and judges. THANKFULLY!

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

no crowd "gathered" in this case for that matter...they KNOW BETTER than to risk arrest these days...in Florida even more so.

WTF? The crowd gathering would be the onlookers who should have otherwise been shopping, until this lady started going off.

Quote

being mad at a store employee or anyone for that matter is not a police matter

Evidently it was enough for an employee to go get the officer.

Quote

until it becomes violent

It's not a very good idea to wait for something to become violent, before taking action. If that were the case we could be just like fireman, sit at the station and wait for something to happen. Sounds great to me, just go pick up the leftovers. Society expects us to prevent as well as stop crimes.
The bottom line is if I was shopping at Best Buy with my four year old (which I did today btw), and somebody starts going ballistic over a dispute, I would want the situation taken care of. I don't want to hear some tool dropping the f-bomb and other things infront of my kid or any other, especially after the cops show-up. If this woman would have acted like an adult we would'nt be having this conversation. Again, my wife works in retail and she takes all kinds of verbal abuse and even sometimes threats. No one should have to put up with that, period. That is what the disorderly conduct statute is for, especially when the behavior happens infront of an officer, I expect them to do something about it.

You would rather your kid witness violence than hear a word?!?!?!?!

Were you toilet trained at gun point?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[warpedskydiver 0]

Relax, I was just giving you shit.

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

I stated it was not grounds for arrest.
I gave you a link - one of many available - that shows you are wrong.

funny thing about law...cops aren't lawyers....they have a very brief period of training for law. That's why we have attornies and judges. THANKFULLY!

If you are referring to your post #119, there is no link provided. You only posted short excerpts from somewhere. The Michigan law could have been overturned for any number of reasons. Since you didn't post the statute in full, and the part of that statute the SCOTUS didn't like, we don't know the WHY.

Like I said, profane language in public and towards a cop ARE grounds for arrest. I DID provide a link to just one statute, in Texas, and there are similar statutes in many, if not most, other states. Whether you like it or agree with it is irrelevant.

It's sad when we have to have laws telling people to be civil towards one another.

[skycop 0]

Quote

The employee called the cop over because the woman left her credit card on the counter and walked away....

I would venture to say that this womans actions as well as the credit card are the reason the officer was called over, but then again I wasn't there, either were you.

Quote

How did it pan out in front of a judge?

I've done probably a couple hundred disorderly conduct arrests, never lost one.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[billvon 3,107]

> Yes, I am also one who may serve on a jury someday.

?? You haven't served on a jury yet? Why not? It's an interesting experience overall.

>Every time I have ever been pulled over for speeding the officer
>has always approached my door with his/her hand on their gun. Would
>you feel justified in shooting them?

If that police precinct had a policy of shooting motorists in the face to "calm them down" - yes, you would be justified.

You seem to be very purposefully missing the point. It is the reasonably expected behavior of the officer that's the crux of the issue here. If the precinct uses tasers only in cases where lethal force might ordinarily be used, then you have no justification to shoot anyone. If they use tasers (and/or guns) during everyday confrontations with annoyed people, then you do.

Simple, really. It is the EXPECTED BEHAVIOR of the officer that is the issue here.

[skycop 0]

Quote

You would rather your kid witness violence than hear a word?!?!?!?!

I'd rather (we) not see or hear any of it and be able to shop in relative peace.

Quote

Were you toilet trained at gun point?

At least it only took one reply for you to start insulting. Sure you want to have another go around? The last time we tried this you insulted me, took your ball and went home.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[KelliJ 0]

I see your point very clearly. Maybe I haven't done well getting mine across. Let me try a new approach....

Name just one jurisdiction in the U.S. where the police use of tasers is so out of control that you would feel justified in shooting an officer who was reaching for his.

BTW, I have been part of a jury pool twice but was not selected either time.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

profane language in public and towards a cop ARE grounds for arrest

Then a citizen should be able to make a citizens arrest when a cop curses them. I've had cops cuss me out. I've had cops call me names and shove me. Nothing I can do but make a complaint which the cops would merely file in the waste basket. The kid in St. George, Mo. has the right idea, video cameras to capture everything the cops do. There are some very good cops but, there are also some major assholes who have no business being a cop or even having a taser much less a gun. Did you watch the video that I provided a link to? That cop was clearly an asshole and there are many more like him. That kid did absolutely nothing wrong but was threatened and berated by an out of control asswipe. After watching that, I should wire my van with cameras, just in case. Hell, I have video of a cop telling me, in not so nice terms, to turn my camera off while I was taking video at the scene of a cop shooting. St. Ann, Mo. police shot a kid who ran from them after he stole a car. Sure, the kid stole a car but, he had no weapon, never threaten them but, the cop saw it to be his duty to kill the kid. Judge, jury, executioner. I told the cop that I have every right to take video and continued to shoot. He came at me, telling me to turn the fucking thing off. What an asshole. Knowing what I know of the St.Ann police, these assholes will knock the crap out of a person. Much like a number of the police forces around St.Louis, they hire thugs who should never be allowed to uphold the law as they often see fit to make up their own version as they go.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

It still seems to me that it is quite a stretch to claim justifiable homicide because a cop reaches for his taser and you are afraid he might use it. I have an aversion to dog bites. Does that mean if a cop comes near me with a dog i can shoot the dog because I'm afraid of being bit?

The answer is: it depends. No, your fear, alone, does not automatically convert your shooting of the dog from an unlawful act into a lawful act. But most crimes require the actor to have a "criminal intent", or "guilty mind" (mens rea) for the act to be a crime. Whether a defendant had criminal intent is for the jury to decide at trial.

So, in many U.S. states, you'd be allowed to argue your "diminished capacity" as a defense at trial, and then it would be up to the jury to decide if your fear nullified any criminal intent (in which case you could be found not guilty), or reduced criminal intent (in which case you could be found guilty of a lesser offense), or had no significant bearing on criminal intent (in which case you could be found guilty as charged).

(Note: Currently, most states let the trial judge decide on a case-by-case basis whether to allow a defendant to argue a d.c. defense to the jury. A few states expressly grant defendants the right to argue a d.c. defense whenever they choose. On the other side, a few other states expressly prohibit any "mental capacity" defense less than an outright insanity defense from being presented.)

(A good example where a defendant's state of mind is a crucial element of the definition of what offense he committed is homicide cases. The very name or definition of many homicide offenses reflects the actor's state of mind: criminally negligent homicide (which is sometimes just a misdemeanor); involuntary manslaughter; voluntary manslaughter; non-premeditated murder; pre-meditated murder; "murder with malice" etc.)