Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Taser Causes Man To Burt Into Flames

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html
    Sure we can OC them. TASERs can be misused as a torture device, as can firearms, pepper spray, clubs whatever. What is unethical or irresponsible about me carrying them? Your article is about a guy who was trying to escape and fight the police while high after huffing gas, I can't think the police were trying to set him on fire. They did put him out after all. Really, if you get out of your mind high in public and in the process cover yourself with a flamable chemical and decide to fight the police, is it the TASERs fault you catch on fire?

  3. #3
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    AK_Amerine wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html
    ........... Really, if you get out of your mind high in public and in the process cover yourself with a flamable chemical and decide to fight the police, is it the TASERs fault you catch on fire?
    Ha ha.....exactly what I was thinking.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  4. #4
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    I've been both buzzed by high voltage and shot. A likely outcome of short lived severe pain beats a likely outcome of death, paralysis, or years of recovery. Yes there need to be more rules about their use, but no, I don't think they're difficult to see as ethical carry weapons.


    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Caldwell, , USA
    Posts
    39

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html
    Almost positive I've seen this same sequence on an episode of CSI.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    AK_Amerine wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html
    ........... Really, if you get out of your mind high in public and in the process cover yourself with a flamable chemical and decide to fight the police, is it the TASERs fault you catch on fire?
    Ha ha.....exactly what I was thinking.
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    AK_Amerine wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Does our OC extend to tasers? Tasers seem to be a torture device, not a defensive weapon, and it's growing difficult to see taser carry as ethical or responsible.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...guns-time.html
    ........... Really, if you get out of your mind high in public and in the process cover yourself with a flamable chemical and decide to fight the police, is it the TASERs fault you catch on fire?
    Ha ha.....exactly what I was thinking.
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?
    Now, you are asking the correct question: when and how should a taser be used.

    You first post questioned the legitimacy of ever using or carrying or possessing a taser, which is just gun control.

    Given the choice between being shot and tazed, I'll take the latter. Far more chance that I'd get up and walk away. So a taser can be a good weapon.

    However, since police officers continue to use them to gain compliance or for torture entertainment, instead of for self defense, I think police officers should be held responsible. And I think it's irresponsible for the manufacturer to continue to do business with unethical customers. They should take a page from Ronnie Barret.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:

    However, since police officers continue to use them to gain compliance or for torture entertainment, instead of for self defense, I think police officers should be held responsible. And I think it's irresponsible for the manufacturer to continue to do business with unethical customers. They should take a page from Ronnie Barret.
    +1 on that, far too often I watch those silly cop shows, and usually someone gets tasered over something BS that it was imho unethical, then when there's a guy freaking out and being a potential hazard to all involved, there's no one around with a tazer... funny how that works.

  9. #9
    Regular Member AZkopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    673

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?
    Wrong. Tasers and firearms are not interchangable.

    Firearms are deadly force, used to stop a subject likely to cause imminent great bodily harm or death to another.

    Tasers are 'less than lethal' force, used to gain compliance from a non-compliant subject.

    Anyone using a Taser in place of a firearm, to repel a lethal, imminent threat is an idiot.

    Tasers have a maximum range of 21', andaneffective range of8-15'. Bothprobes must make contact with the subject, and not be inhibited by thick or loose clothing, tobe effective.

    Tasers, just as OC spray and Mace before that, are a means to gain compliance from a subject without having to beat the living s$%t out of them. It prevents injury to the officer and minimizes the injury to the subject.

    Unlike the old 'stun guns', which just used pain compliance via electricity, Tazers actually generate 'white noise' in the nervous system, causing the body between the probes to 'lock up'. Yes it is painful, but that is not the primary purpose. By locking up the subject's nervous system, you are able to quickly move in and subdue him.

    Yes, it sucks to be the human torch mentioned in the OP. It is not through misuse of the Taser, however. If you choose to douse yourselfin flamable fumes, you risk going "boom" through static electricity, or neaby smokers, among other things. Yes, the arc of the probes set him off, but generally, there is not time to have the subjects fill out a questionaire before choosing which non-lethal option to use.

    I was going to stay out of this rant, but I can't let statements like the above just stand on their own. Such mis-information is no better than those who say "people who carry guns just want to shoot people", or "why didn't they just shoot the gun out of his hand?"





  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    AZkopper wrote:
    I was going to stay out of this rant, but I can't let statements like the above just stand on their own.

    You should have stayed out, then, especially if you think it's okay for a costumed bufoon to subject people to electroshock torture just becase they are disobedient, even if they are obviously presenting no physical threat.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    AZkopper wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?
    Tasers are 'less than lethal' force, used to gain compliance from a non-compliant subject.
    And that is the problem, What is the defintion of "non-Compliance"?

    Is a stabbing victim that is sitting on the curb peacefully, but refusing an ambulance ride for medical treatment "non-Compliant" and worthy of being tased?

    How about an82 yr-old woman arguing with a 280 pound 6'6" tall cop over a traffic stop, is that activity "Non-Compliance" and worthy of being hit with taser probes?

    Many police departments do not have standard operating procedures defining when a taser should or can be used. And it has simplybecome a legal torture device in many cases. I would be a very pleased person if every user if a taser got the same electricty through them at the time of use. I bet a whole lot less deployments for non-violent subjects would be happening out there.

    Many departments acquired taser units to deal withviolent subjects while using a less-lethal tool. But the officers using them are not using them for that.
    I should invent a "taser-proof" garment, something that cuases the voltage to short circuit across the garment so the person hit by it does not receive the charge. it should be easy enough to do.

    I am actually quite surprised some overzealous cop has not tased a person legally O-C'ing yet, just becuase he does not like that he is not the only person armed.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    I should invent a "taser-proof" garment, something that cuases the voltage to short circuit across the garment so the person hit by it does not receive the charge. it should be easy enough to do.
    Many people have already done, or attempted to do this.

    As usual, there are calls to ban taser-protection from ordinary citizens and allow only cops and military to possess it. I am not aware of any bans yet, though. Google it and you will find references to this.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Roanoke, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    Are any of you who are criticizing the LEO's police officers? Have you gone through the training to use a taser? If so, then I am much more inclined to think you have a legitimate opinion on the matter. If not, please stop armchairing.

    You will never know what it's like to be a police officer, and quite frankly I find the lack of respect for LEO's on this thread and some others that I have seen repulsive.

    Sure there are bad cops out there, but the vast majority of them are good people trying to do the best they can to protect and serve the community.

    When a police officer uses a taser on duty, a superior officer, usually a Sergeant comes to investigate and debrief the situation to ensure proper use and the use of the taser is recorded in the report of the arrest.

    Police officers use tasers to keep themselves and the people they are tasing safe - safer than introducing a gun into the equation. And the fact that some people cry torture is absolutely ridiculous. Torture would be sticking needles under their finger nails, not using a device that in most cases they can't even feel the effects of after 15 minutes. It is a compliance tool that does it's job well.

  14. #14
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post



    I'd like to get a Taser X26c. They're legal for ciitizens (non-LEOs). But they're awfully expensive.

    ~$900.

    Seldom see them cheaper.






  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Roanoke, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    And the "costumed bufoon" that you speak so daftly about is the person you are going to call when something bad happens to you, Tomahawk. If you really think police officers are such evil people, save all the tax payers of the world some money and never call them.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Kenosis wrote:
    And the "costumed bufoon" that you speak so daftly about is the person you are going to call when something bad happens to you, Tomahawk. If you really think police officers are such evil people, save all the tax payers of the world some money and never call them.
    Why so statist?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Roanoke, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    I'm not a statist by any measure, I simply have a respect for the law enforcement community, and several of my good friends are police officers so I know what their job is like and it frustrates me when they get smeared for the acts of the few bad cops out there.

    Sorry I got aggressive, I don't harbor any harsh feelings toward you; I guess it was just a heat of the moment thing. I didn't mean to be rude :?

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Kenosis wrote:
    And the "costumed bufoon" that you speak so daftly about is the person you are going to call when something bad happens to you, Tomahawk. If you really think police officers are such evil people, save all the tax payers of the world some money and never call them.
    Save me the tax dollars, and quit stealing from me to pay for them. The only reason I'd call them is to satisfy mandatory reporting requirements.

    More often, the "something bad happening to me" is the cops, themselves. Who protects me from the cops?

    Tomahawk is correct.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Kenosis wrote:
    I'm not a statist by any measure, I simply have a respect for the law enforcement community, and several of my good friends are police officers so I know what their job is like and it frustrates me when they get smeared for the acts of the few bad cops out there.

    Sorry I got aggressive, I don't harbor any harsh feelings toward you; I guess it was just a heat of the moment thing. I didn't mean to be rude :?
    Alright, look, I was trolling a little, too, I guess. Caught me in a mood.

    But to be clear, any cop who thinks it's okay to use a taser on an old woman is indeed a costumed bufoon. As is any cop who uses it for pain compliance (aka torture) instead of as a weapon against violent people.

    I wouldn't agree that the "vast majority of cops" are good, I would say it varies from department to department, and some are better than others. Where I live the department is mostly professional, but there are some bad apples. I have been places where the cops were less than professional and curteous, just a bit less.

    But it seems that all too often, as Will Grigg likes to say, the default setting for cops these days is overkill. All that money for all that stuff, and judges and DAs who side with them when they do something questionable, and to top it off they have union backing. All adds up to too much.

    As for the part about me calling the cops, I try to avoid it unless I have no other choice. I very much dislike being dependent on policemen for anything, and in some cases you are required by law to call them, so those don't count. A free person should strive to do without help from government officials as much as possible. Every time you pick up that phone it gives them another excuse to tax you for their services.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    AZkopper wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?
    Wrong. Tasers and firearms are not interchangable.
    No. You're wrong. There is a range issue, but handguns and taserguns are short range weapons, only to be used to protect the officer from imminent lethal threat. A gun on the ground is not a lethal threat, so no handgun or tasergun is to be used.

    Tasers are 'less than lethal' force, used to gain compliance from a non-compliant subject.
    OH

    MY

    GOD!


    They're actually admitting it openly.


    Taserguns are lethal, so drop that lie about nonlethality. Lethality is a binary question.

    Further, any cop using a tasergun to "gain compliance" has declared war on America. I told you what a tasergun is to be used for. Commit that to memory.

    Cops are not allowed to "gain compliance," certainly not with lethal weapons.


    Anyone using a Taser in place of a firearm, to repel a lethal, imminent threat is an idiot.
    Then turn in the taserguns, because that's exactly why you have them, as a handgun replacement. They should never have left cops in possession of handguns once the taserguns were issued.

    Tasers have a maximum range of 21', and an effective range of 8-15'. Both probes must make contact with the subject, and not be inhibited by thick or loose clothing, to be effective.
    That's close to the same engagement range for a handgun. Any further than that, and the cop isn't in imminent fear of death.

    Tasers, just as OC spray and Mace before that, are a means to gain compliance from a subject without having to beat the living s$%t out of them. It prevents injury to the officer and minimizes the injury to the subject.
    That was one of the sickest paragraphs ever uttered in human history.
    I can't believe that I'm reading that America is officially dead.






  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    You first post questioned the legitimacy of ever using or carrying or possessing a taser, which is just gun control.
    Noted, tasers are guns.

    If the standards for using this particular lethal weapon are so relaxed that they can be used with impunity, then this class of lethal weapon ought be banned for everyone.

    It ought never be the case that lethal weapons can be used on another for imagined and non-lethal provocations and without consequence. Taserguns are presently immoral to manufacture, use and own.

    Given the choice between being shot and tazed, I'll take the latter. Far more chance that I'd get up and walk away. So a taser can be a good weapon.
    Your chances of getting shot are slim. Your chances of getting electrocuted with a taser are much higher, since the cops are not bound to use this manner of lethal force in the same limited instances that they would use a gun.

    However, since police officers continue to use them to gain compliance or for torture entertainment, instead of for self defense, I think police officers should be held responsible. And I think it's irresponsible for the manufacturer to continue to do business with unethical customers. They should take a page from Ronnie Barret.
    It should be a felony for a cop to draw a tasergun unless the cop can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was under imminent lethal threat.





  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Tasers are 'less than lethal' force, used to gain compliance from a non-compliant subject.
    OH

    MY

    GOD!


    They're actually admitting it openly.


    Taserguns are lethal, so drop that lie about nonlethality. Lethality is a binary question.
    Lets face it. Tasers are cattle prods with darts and wires.

    Cattle prods have been around a lot longer. Taser just dressed them up and gave them a different name. If electro-pain compliance was all that acceptable, cops could have been using cattle prods starting far earlier.

    Separately, and not to offend Kenosis--who seems like a gracious fellow,the phrase is "less lethal", as compared to "less than lethal." Its an important distinction.

    I remember reading about this point some years ago. As I recall, tasers were formerly lumped into the category of "non-lethal" weapons. Then they were characterized as less-lethal. I'm not sure if it was because the entire category of weapons--bean bags, tear gas, etc--were re-characterized as less-lethal, or because just tasers were re-characterized.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  23. #23
    Regular Member AZkopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    673

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    And that is the problem, What is the defintion of "non-Compliance"?
    Non-compliance is when you are given a legal order or command, and failure to comply is consistant with obstruction or resisting. If you are getting Tasered, legally you should be going to jail for obstruction or resisting.

    Every place I have worked, and every place I am familiar with, has the same standard: the Taser is a level of force on par with going 'hands on'. Meaning, if you can put them in a control hold, use physical force against them, or arrest them, you can Taser them. Any use of the Taser requires supervisor notification (as does any use of force) and documentation (a police report). Tasers have 'memory', so all discharges are recorded (duration, time, date, etc).

    The reason most youtube videos or newsreel videos make headlines are because the officer doing the Tasing is operating out of policy and illegally. You're example of an 82 year old woman being Tased for not getting in an ambulance would be such an example of illegal force (I saw "would be", because I am assuming that was a real incident, but am not personally familiar with it). Obviously, as with any level of force, it is up to the LEO to show some level of common sense and judgement. As with much of the world nowadays, the majority of people are sorely lacking in both.

    Misuse of a Taser is no different than misuse of oc spray or misuse of going 'hands on'. They are an unlawful use of force.



    Also, Tomahawk don't try to get up my @$$ or try to put your words in my mouth. I simply corrected a fallacious statement on use of force.Imade no statements on "thinking it's okay for a costumed bufoon to subject people to electroshock torture just becase they are disobedient, even if they are obviously presenting no physical threat." I see you did not argue the facts of my statement, so either you agree with me, or don't have enough knowledge on the subject to have an educated opinion. Go shovel your personal issuesat someoneelse.



  24. #24
    Regular Member AZkopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    673

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    AZkopper wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Tasers are to be used in place of guns, that is, to repel a lethal, imminent, threat.

    Was there a lethal threat in this case?
    Wrong. Tasers and firearms are not interchangable.
    No. You're wrong. There is a range issue, but handguns and taserguns are short range weapons, only to be used to protect the officer from imminent lethal threat. A gun on the ground is not a lethal threat, so no handgun or tasergun is to be used.

    Tasers are 'less than lethal' force, used to gain compliance from a non-compliant subject.
    OH

    MY

    GOD!


    They're actually admitting it openly.


    Taserguns are lethal, so drop that lie about nonlethality. Lethality is a binary question.

    Further, any cop using a tasergun to "gain compliance" has declared war on America. I told you what a tasergun is to be used for. Commit that to memory.

    Cops are not allowed to "gain compliance," certainly not with lethal weapons.


    Anyone using a Taser in place of a firearm, to repel a lethal, imminent threat is an idiot.
    Then turn in the taserguns, because that's exactly why you have them, as a handgun replacement. They should never have left cops in possession of handguns once the taserguns were issued.

    Tasers have a maximum range of 21', and an effective range of 8-15'. Both probes must make contact with the subject, and not be inhibited by thick or loose clothing, to be effective.
    That's close to the same engagement range for a handgun. Any further than that, and the cop isn't in imminent fear of death.

    Tasers, just as OC spray and Mace before that, are a means to gain compliance from a subject without having to beat the living s$%t out of them. It prevents injury to the officer and minimizes the injury to the subject.
    That was one of the sickest paragraphs ever uttered in human history.
    I can't believe that I'm reading that America is officially dead.





    OK, other than you living in your personal freeman fantasyland again, there are so many things wrong with this post, I'm not sure where to begin.

    You said, "handguns and taserguns are short range weapons, only to be used to protect the officer from imminent lethal threat." Wrong, wrong, wrong. You do not get to create your own little world, with your own little definitions, and your own little laws. You may not like that Taser's are not viewed that way, but please, don't confuse your longings for the real world.

    If you consider a Taser to be a lethal weapon, you must consider oc spray to be lethal as well.

    I been Tased in training several times, Tased uncooperative people who refused to submit to arrest as opposed to fighting them, and seen dozens of LEOand "refusing" arrestees Tased. No one died. No one went to the hospital. No one was even sore after a few minutes. Multiply that by literally tens of thousand documented uses. To continue with your tripe that Tasers are lethal means they are the worst lethal weapon ever invented--second only to the nerf bat.

    If you think cops are not "allowed to gain compliance" you are really living in freeman fantasyland. If I tell you you are under arrest, and you do not submit to that arrest, I can use force to make you comply. If I attempt to detain you for investigation of a crime, and you refuse, I can use force to detain you. If you get out of your car during a traffic stop, and approach me, and I feel you are being confrontational or belligerent, and I order you back, and you refuse, I don't have to runaway, or say "gee, I'm sorry I made you mad, go ahead and drive away". You are obstructing my legal duty, and refusing a lawful order. I could take the chance that you won't walk up and punch my lights out, or engage you hand to hand-since you are percieved as a threat--and arrest you, or Tase you and arrest you. However you slice it, I am "gaining compliance" from you.

    So, you feel that if a LEO tells someone they are under arrest, and they refuse to submit to that arrest, the officer has no recourse, and cannot use force to affect the arrest? That's a crock!! If an officer can use a Taser instead of having to go hand-to-hand, it is preferred. Less chance of ANYONE getting hurt.

    If you think that the Taser is lethal and no different than a firearm, what do you think would happen if an officer attempted to arrest a guy for a misdemeanor warrant, and the guy refused and got combative, and the officer pulled his gun and shot him. That officer would be charged with attempt murder. That just shows the absurdity of your positions.

    Obviously, you seem to believe that no one has the authority to order you to do anything, at any time. You are above all laws. You are above arrest. Anyone who attempts to make you conform to a law is infringing on your Sovereign Self and it is an act of war.

    Y'all can get back to your delusions, I'm outta here

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    AZkopper wrote:
    Non-compliance is when you are given a legal order or command, and failure to comply is consistant with obstruction or resisting. If you are getting Tasered, legally you should be going to jail for obstruction or resisting.
    A tasergun is a lethal weapon. If a person is being electrocuted, that person has placed someone else in imminent fear of death.

    The only way lethal force is employed is to counter lethal force.

    Every place I have worked, and every place I am familiar with, has the same standard: the Taser is a level of force on par with going 'hands on'.
    This is terrifying. A tasergun is a substitute for a pistol, not an officer's time in talking.

    Meaning, if you can put them in a control hold, use physical force against them, or arrest them, you can Taser them.
    Dear God. Is this nonsense actually believed? Touching a citizen ought only be done under the rarest of circumstances, lethal force employed yet even more rarely. That said, a tasergun or a handgun is is not a substitute for a tackle.

    Any use of the Taser requires supervisor notification (as does any use of force) and documentation (a police report). Tasers have 'memory', so all discharges are recorded (duration, time, date, etc).
    And how many prosecutions result from the multitude of daily misuses?

    Misuse of a Taser is no different than misuse of oc spray or misuse of going 'hands on'. They are an unlawful use of force.
    Drawing a tasergun is the same as drawing a handgun. Pointing a tasergun at someone is the same as pointing a handgun at someone. Using a tasergun on a non-lethal threat, or menacing lethal force against a non-lethal threat, is torture and ought result in a federal civil rights prosecution. If a few cops started going away, tasergun use would plummet.

    Also, Tomahawk don't try to get up my @$$ or try to put your words in my mouth. I simply corrected a fallacious statement on use of force. I made no statements on "thinking it's okay for a costumed bufoon to subject people to electroshock torture just becase they are disobedient, even if they are obviously presenting no physical threat." I see you did not argue the facts of my statement, so either you agree with me, or don't have enough knowledge on the subject to have an educated opinion. Go shovel your personal issues at someone else.
    Your statements are erroneous and inconsistent with limited government, subservient government, and a free country. Tomahawk's arguments are valid.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •