• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Texas man tazered for open carry

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Edit: I guess what we are lacking is the motion by the prosecutor. That'd probably be an interesting read...
Well, not necessarily. The prosecutor doesn't have to provide citations for not doing anything. He could just say "Harry, err, I mean ya Honor, we're both gettin' tired of this bovine excrement. The guy didn't aim at anyone, he didn't menace anyone, he was walking peacefully down the road, same as you or I. We need to nip this stuff in the bud. I'm requesting to nolle prosequi this case in the interests of justice, because the guy didn't harm or attempt to harm anyone and there's no evidence of malicious intent ('ceptin' maybe on the officer's part).
 

warvet68/69

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
26
Location
United States Louisville,Ky.
Well, not necessarily. The prosecutor doesn't have to provide citations for not doing anything. He could just say "Harry, err, I mean ya Honor, we're both gettin' tired of this bovine excrement. The guy didn't aim at anyone, he didn't menace anyone, he was walking peacefully down the road, same as you or I. We need to nip this stuff in the bud. I'm requesting to nolle prosequi this case in the interests of justice, because the guy didn't harm or attempt to harm anyone and there's no evidence of malicious intent ('ceptin' maybe on the officer's part).
These Officers,seem to not know the Texas OC, law themselves.That's real scary in my mind's thinking.
 
Last edited:

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
Falls they do have an automatic shut off after 5 seconds. Not sure if there are different styles, but the ones I've seen and dealt with have a 5 second deployment.

Meaning once you pull the trigger you can realize and it will send current for 5 seconds. After said 5 seconds it automatically stops sending current but remains on so that all you have to do is pull the trigger again for another 5 second deployment. You can either hold the trigger down and it will discharge past 5 seconds or you can manually flip the on/off switch to terminate before the 5 seconds.

But 1 pull of trigger is supposed to equal 1 5 second burst no longer. If this officer was lying they could tell by downloading the chip in the battery/magazine area of the tazer. Ours keep track of exactly when/how many times/how long each deployment was and it gets downloaded to a spreadsheet so there's no fudging it.

Just wanted to clarify that for you Falls since you made the vehicle comparison I thought you may have been unaware of the mechanism he was talking about. Hope it helps.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Thank you for all that information. I was not aware of any of that as to tazer functioning. Appreciate the education!
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
These Officers,seem to not know the Texas OC, law themselves.That's real scary in my mind's thinking.
That's because they aren't Law Officers, they are Law Enforcement Officers. They're very well trained and constantly practice how to apply handcuffs, how to deploy chemical and electrical weaponry, how to take down suspects, how, when and where to shoot... that's all enforcement stuff.
The law? That's a matter for prosecutors and the courts, it's just law enforcement's job to get as many as they can in front of the courts so long as they're just "acting in good faith". <- something we aren't allowed to apply as a concept.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
warvet68/69 said:
These Officers,seem to not know the Texas OC, law themselves.That'sl scary in my mind's thinking.

Ignorance would be in their favor in this case, it's unlikely they're entitled to that claim. More likely, they were perfectly aware that state law makes no prohibition on the activity they were interfering with and they were instead using grossly disproportionate levels of force to attempt to violate 4th amendment rights to investigate a potential 'violation' of a preempted and therefore void city ordinance. IE the 'supervisor' guy that showed up suspended his conscience and followed the king's orders. Edit: to be clear, this is just my suspicion as an outside observer. I have no involvement in the case
 
Last edited:
Top