Taser Causes Man To Burt Into Flames

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

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

Click to expand...

OH

MY

GOD!

They're actually admitting it openly.

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

Click to expand...

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.

imported post

Nutczak wrote:

And that is the problem, What is the defintion of "non-Compliance"?

Click to expand...

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.

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?

Click to expand...

Wrong. Tasers and firearms are not interchangable.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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 :arrow:

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.

Click to expand...

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'.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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).

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

Your statements are erroneous and inconsistent with limited government, subservient government, and a free country. Tomahawk's arguments are valid.

imported post

What does any of this discussion about LEO use have to do civilian carry of TASERs? It is well noted that there is an inequality. Lets stick to what is useful and relevant to those of us on the citizen side, please. So that said, anyone know of any state's case law or ruling that considers use of a TASER a lethal attack akin to shooting or stabbing a person?

imported post

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum3/7073.html