Innocent Man 'tased'.

[AX10]

Though he tried to plead with police, they did not want to hear of it.

:argh:

http://216.109.117.135/search/cache?p=Taser+Video&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8&pstart=1&b=11&u=abclocal.go.com/wtvg/news/video/323_taservideo.html&w=taser+video&d=20322802DA&icp=1&.intl=us

also, if Police are there to "serve the public" then why are so
many departments taking the word of a for-profit corporation over
the concerns of the public. Many police agencies must be held
accountable for doing this. It is unacceptable.

[Bark Bark Bark]

1. Oh, That's Cute...

...the cops fry him, and then, when they find out he's innocent--and armed with plenty of grounds to sue their asses--they proceed to charge him with "disorderly conduct" and "resisting arrest."

Cops shouldn't make us angry. Cops aren't going to like us when we're angry.

[AX10]

2. My trust and confidence in the Police has plummeted over the last...

few months. I don't trust any COP with a taser on their belt.

Just two months ago, I thought very highly of the police, but after doing research into the Taser and it's abuse, I have great trouble trusting police (with a taser). Sorry, but that's just the way it is right now. I still like Supply Side Jesus(DU poster) who is an officer of the law. He is fair on the issue.

I'm not saying all police are bad, but that I cannot trust many of them with this new weapon. It's just too easy to inflict pain on someone with just the push of a button and with Bush in power, the government has been overstepping it's bounds for 5 years now.

[theshadow]

4. But again, you're not telling the whole story.

The cops roll up on a robbery alarm. They see this guy. They try to stop him. He resists and gets shocked. The cops aren't mind readers. They don't know that the alarm is false, or the man is resisting because he's drunk.

So tell me, what would you have done in their position?

[AX10]

5. Why the HELL would you hurt someone for passive resisitance?

:wtf:? "papers please?", or we'll shock you. :eyes: This crap happens in irate nations and now it happens in America and everyone seems to think it's alright. :eyes:

[theshadow]

9. Answer my question.

You are again claiming that a major travesty has occurred with police procedure. You have the facts of the case. This is very simple: armed robbery alarm; man on foot; man resists.

You don't have the privilege of hindsight. What would you have done right then and there?

And by the way, there is no such thing as "passive resistance" in this scenario. This isn't some protest in front of the Chamber of Commerce.

[Conservativesux]

14. What did the cops do before tazers? Oh, thats right shoot first ask

questions later.

After all, property is more important then human life or health, right?

[theshadow]

16. No, they tried to take the person down...

... got their gun grabbed and killed with it. And this was an armed robbery alarm... that means someone (it appeared) was getting held up. I suppose that's okay, after all who cares about a minimum wage convenience store employee?

[AX10]

17. Police used to have to verbally communicate with the person.

Now they can assault anyone they want with the push of a button.

The Third Reich had a "show you papers or else" policy. Now we have that in America. :cry:

[theshadow]

22. Well, it's obvious you DON'T have an alternative.

Just more platitudes, that now descend into the last grasp that always come out in these discussions: compare the police to the Nazis.

No, they can't "assault anyone they want". When there are clear abuses- which I agree there have been- there are going to be repercussions. Your problem is that you've lowered the tolerance level to the point that you're finding fault in every Taser case.

[AX10]

25. I never said that. The Taser gun was MEANT to be used...

to stop VIOLENT suspects and prevent injuries from prolonged physical fights (people holding knives, sharp objects, etc...). Tasers were NEVER meant to be used to force someone to comply with basic instructions. Someday this many happen to you and you won't want to show your ID and you'll shocked for not showing your ID. :nopity:

[Conservativesux]

52. Its the old" It'll never happen to me" routine at work here.

[SouthernDem2004]

55. The taser is not meant for armed subjects.

Knives and sharp objects would initiate deadly force in most cases. Also, the length of the fight is not considered. It is meant to stop physical fights period and avoid Officer contact with violent subjects.


Peace

[AX10]

57. Then we the public have been lied to by both the Police and Taser.

The Taser was sold to be used at the 4th level in the force continuum, not at the first. :eyes: Why should I trust the police now? Do you support tasering passive resistors, slow to "comply", to 'calm' people down? What's the level of usage?

[SouthernDem2004]

61. The FC does not use levels.

You do not have to go 1-2-3-4-5. You can start with deadly force. A man with a knife will get shoot in most cases.

The FC is merely a training tool.

[AX10]

64. Of course you can jump one 1 to 7 in a split second.

Now, if I refuse to show you my ID, should I be tasered?

[SouthernDem2004]

65. Need more info then that...

On a traffic stop they would arrest you if you failed to produce id. If you resisted arrest you could be subject to stun weapons.

[AX10]

66. What if I passivly resist. If the cop takes my hands and puts them...

behind my back and I don't fight. I've seen it happen during peaceful protests.

[SouthernDem2004]

67. That depends...

He has several options and it would depend on his Department's policy. If I told you to turn around and put your hands behind your back and you refused and just stood there, I would spray you. People tend to comply once sprayed.

[AX10]

68. My trust in police just plumeted.

For passive resistance you can be assaulted. :eyes: This is what millions of people died for (that's a waste of life). :eyes:

[SouthernDem2004]

71. It is safer for all parties if OC is used.

If you refuse to comply the way I would do it if I could not use OC because oh lets say I am in the ER, would be to Grab an arm and use an arm bar to take you to the ground. (Not going to feel to good.) Then I would use another hold to bring the arm I was holding behind you and up at an angle. (Feels really bad.) I am then going to use pain compliance until you bring your other arm around and I can cuff you. The potential for injury would be alot higher then OC to both the suspect and the Officer.

[AX10]

73. You can't try to pull my arms around first?

:eyes:

[SouthernDem2004]

76. No, its not safe.

It would give the suspect a chance to strike the Officer or reach for a weapon. Bad bad juju....

[AX10]

80. I have read of many cases were the police used the taser...

to subdue people wielding knives. Many police departments wanted tasers
so that they could do just that. They used to have to pull the gun, now they pull the taser and it does save that life. For the record, I would have NEVER expected a taser to be used in a real GUN fight. I'd expect the officer to use their firearm.

[SouthernDem2004]

81. In knife cases it is used when two of more Officers are present.

One deploys a gun and the second deploys the stun weapon. This allows lethal force to be used quickly if the stun weapon fails. Tasers and the like work better then OC and less-lethal shotgun ammo but all fail on occasion.

[lumpy]

27. They should have done

what they used to do before tasers. Use common sense, let the circumstances determine the response. Tasers have made it very easy for police to shoot, so-to-speak, and ask questions later. Tasers have their place, maybe, but should be used with discretion just as with guns. More than 80 deaths have been caused be indiscriminate use of this weapon called the taser. A shot in the leg with a gun can forestall a death. The damnable things are weapons, not toys.

[AX10]

29. What is very upsetting is how many here see this as OK.

Should it be OK to shock someone on the street if they won't answer a question? Too many here at DU think so. :argh: There was NO need to assault this man. An innocent man is tasered and arrested. That is only a criminal act by the police and the police only. I hear that tasers "hurt like hell" and Tasers like all other weapons should be used repsonsibly.

[theshadow]

33. Shoot in the leg?

That's better than using a Taser? Do you know what the femoral artery is?

But I DO agree strongly on one thing you said: it is a weapon. I'm tired of it being called a "tool" or a "device" and of seeing police (and police chiefs) getting zapped for the television news. It sends a wrong message. It is a weapon.

[lumpy]

44. Yes I do know where the femoral artery is.

I also know where the heart is. Glad you do agree that the taser is weapon and should be used discriminately and with care. Too many people who have not deserved to die have been killed with this weapon. The 'powers that be' are finally realizing that this weapon has been used by people who can be just as dangerous as an armed criminal. Another thing, what will happen when this weapon falls into the hands of the criminal?... and it will.

[liberalnurse]

54. Thank you Shadow.....

Jesus H Christ! The risk of death or disabling injury to a suspect is 100% guaranteed with a GSW to the leg....let alone the cost of medical care to the presiding agency's budget.

I am guilty of the Taser-tool association. I'll take it under advisement.

[AX10]

59. I do agree that the Taser is a weapon and should be used as such.

I do respect those officers who are willing to be 'tased' to understand how it works, but the chiefs who go on TV are guilty of misleading the public by doing these displays to leniently. Also, shouldn't the police be more worried about the public they serve than the pockets of a for profit company, TaserInt?

[lumpy]

31. Very simple indeed.

Armed robbery;man on foot;man resists. Case closed. Too simple. Fill us in with the facts. Do we have them? Answer my question.

[theshadow]

35. All I know is what was on the clip.

I can't find anything on Google about it. All I can do is operate with the same criteria as X10 used for his original premise.

That said, what would I have done? It depends on the degree of resistance. If it reaches a level that can't be overcome or seems dangerous, then the Taser is appropriate. Remember, the premise at the time is that the guy is armed. Mace wouldn't be appropriate, it's not reliable. You're not going to shoot him without a weapon being displayed; on the other hand you don't want to get mixed-up with too much close-contact,in case he is armed. To me, this was a time to use the Taser, but I emphasize that's based on what is known from the "clip".

[Conservativesux]

12. Just wait till that riot control microwave device gets used here in the US

Nothing like making sure the little people disperse when ordered by officer friendly!

That you internal organs will be fried along with your eyes and skin wont bother them anymore then tazering you does now.

Sieg Hiel, baby !!!

[Bark Bark Bark]

48. Link to article...and more taser debate from me

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6014

Read it and weep, folks. I couldn't find this other article--wish I had posted about it when I first read it--but it described the testing of the device: test subject were warned beforehand to remove coins, watches, and anything else that might create "hot spots" when zapped.

Real crowds probably won't get any such warning.

(Other side effects to be determined later.)

Now, pop quiz:

(1) How often do cops need THAT sort of weapon for crowd control?

(1a) Given that the correct answer to (1) is, "not bloody often," do you think they might be anticipating upcoming massive civil unrest?

(2) The new weapon is considered "safe" and police promise to use it responsibly. Name other "safe" weapons that cops have promised to use responsibly yet regularly abuse (often on children), occasionally with permanent injuries and/or fatalities.

(2b) BONUS: Name as many incidents as you can of police officers being punished with jail time for abusing their weapons resulting in injury or fatality.

(3) When Officer Zappy McTriggerhappy injures or kills someone you care about without due cause, and your local authorities give him a free pass, will you shrug your shoulders and say, "well, at least they didn't shoot (him, her) in the head?" Explain.

[Conservativesux]

51. All the warning labels on Microwave ovens warn about the dangers

of being subjected to the microwaves emitted, and now the cops are going to use these toasters on live people, during demonstrations...err...I mean riots?

So much for the "caring about public safety" excuse they always use.

[AX10]

3. I hope that man takes their houses away. They would have...

had it coming.

[Conservativesux]

49. Unfortunatey, it just doesnt work that way. Police unions are quite

powerful and will bring out the big guns (attorneys) to squash this, should the victim bring a lawsuit against them.

[AX10]

60. Police Unions are one the few I don't care for.

Teamsters are the other.

[Conservativesux]

Self-delete Dupe

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[seabeyond]

10. how callous. i certainly shed tears over the fallen police

or soldier, or the innocent victim. i am not an advocate for abusive police. i am also not cold hearted, and see police unwanted or needed.

[Conservativesux]

21. Pleanty of cold hearted cops out there. Remember Diallo in NYC?

41 shots fired by 4 white cops, at an unarmed Black man who had NO criminal past, and was a student, in fact.

Some of the bullets tore through the soles of his feet when he was laying there dying or dead. The cops didnt care then , so I dont care now.

You choose the dogs you sleep with, you pick up thier fleas.

[theshadow]

23. And I remember...

...cops who were gunned down by members of what was the "Radical Left" in the 1970's, but I didn't condemn everyone on that side of the spectrum because of the crimes of an errant few.

[seabeyond]

24. i am well aware, and they get to own it

you comment, all yours. i wont blanket all cops with a comment like that. any death, i will shed a tear.

[AX10]

28. But it's just like people, there are good and bad.

Most police I know of are good people, but yes the other kind exists, and they are bad. I was chased away by one in NYC because I wanted directions and the cop said that "I was interupting his business" :wtf:? He was just standing there keeping an eye, nothing else. (Big City Police :scared:)

[Conservativesux]

41. Sure, but the "bad" operate under the color of law, which these days

seems to allow them to commit violent acts against the people they are sworn to protect, with little consequences, if any.

[AX10]

45. I agree 100%.

[noiretextatique]

50. overkill is a police tradition in *certain* communities

http://groups.msn.com/AMERICANSNAFU/snafucopsamok.msnw

my friend ronnie settles is listed on this site...i went to high school with him. he was found hung in a signal hill, ca jail cell...it wasn't suicide. signal hill cops were nortorius for their racism...they called the department "a stairway to heaven," for *certain* people.
it was a huge scandal at the time, and his parents sued and won.
rip ronnie :cry:

[AX10]

62. I find it hypocritical of police to say that they don't want to kill yet..

most support the death penalty. I smell hypocracy. Also, cops should be held criminally responsible for their actions should they break the law.

[theshadow]

11. That is one of the most insulting...

... heartless generalizations I've ever read on this board.

[Conservativesux]

15. You havent been rousted by police under false pretenses. I have.

You dont like it, tough stuff, cowboy!

[theshadow]

19. {Self-Deleted}

[Conservativesux]

34. I didnt say that. You did. Maybe you should look in a mirror, officer.

You might not like what you see.

[lumpy]

36. "cops are just Nazi fascists unworthy of......"

Sorry, putting words in other people's mouths won't work. That doesn't sum it up. Fade into the shadows.

[theshadow]

39. You're right. I deleted it.

[lumpy]

46. Bless you.

Peace

[Conservativesux]

40. A very bad debating tactic to be sure. One used when the person

needs to label someone, as they are losing the debate.

[theshadow]

43. No,

I jumped to a conclusion that I shouldn't have and I'm being gracious enough to retract it.

[AX10]

20. I don't believe that all police are bad. But I can understand why...

you feel this way due to your experience. Why should we blindly give police the benefit of the doubt? They have a job to do but that does not mean that they can dictate what is right/wrong. We are a free society. This is America. If the government oversteps their boundries, then they must be held accountable. I'm also noticing this trend within the younger deputies to be absurdly aggressive. The older ones seem to put pride into the fact that they are "peace officers".

[Conservativesux]

26. I agree. Not all cops are bad, but many are. These days they are

taugh in the academies that its "officer safety" first. Back in the day a police offcier was expected to take risks with his/her life in order to insure that the public was safe, and many died as genuine heros.

That just isnt the case anymore.

The days of "Adam 12" are dead, never to return.

[theshadow]

32. I guess the 150+ who were killed last year.....

... and the families and children they left behind were just a bunch of losers, then.

[Conservativesux]

37. Half of those killed where in accidents involving police chases in

vehicles, and accidents, not by gun fire while protecting the public.

Two sheriff officers just died in a helicopter crash in Sacramento, CA last week and the cops are still calling them "heroes".

How did they become "heroes", I wonder ?

They were not engaged in a pursuit of hardened killers or criminals at the time, so one wonders.

[AX10]

70. Not all officers are killed by gunfire. The helicopter crash...

was not due to an unruly suspect that put them in harms way.

[lumpy]

38. You said it, no one here said this:

"I guess the 150+ who were killed last year....."
Posted by theshadow
... and the families and children they left behind were just a bunch of losers, then. Your words, shadow.

[theshadow]

42. I read his.....

"Back in the day a police officer was expected to take risks with his/her life in order to insure that the public was safe, and many died as genuine heroes. That just isn't the case anymore."

I thought he meant those killed today aren't heroes. Maybe he meant it isn't the case anymore that "a police officer was expected to take risks with his/her life in order to insure that the public was safe".

So my comment was off-track, but still.... police are still expected- and do- take risks. Is 150 officers enough of a sacrifice?

[Conservativesux]

47. When those same cops run over pedestrians on a high speed pursuit

after a person who stole a car, shoplifted or commited some other minor, non-deadly offence, do you cry for those innocents that are killed by the police as well?

After all, only HALF of those 150 officers were killed during a shootout or some other violent crime.

Fact is that police have one of the safer jobs in America these days compared to many other jobs not involving guns, tazers and cars.

Are all the workers who die performing their duties "heroes" too?

[AX10]

58. Fishermen have a dangerous job and the highest fatality rate.

I hope that the Police do realize that this is a FACT.

[SouthernDem2004]

69. Lobster fisherman to be exact but garbage men did also. So? /nt

[AX10]

72. What I am saying to the police is that they should not be acting...

"all I'm the only one with a hard job". It's dishonest. There are other professions that are dangerous too. Fishermen has a very lousy job. And the military, well, just look at Iraq.

[SouthernDem2004]

74. Odd, I know ALOT of Police and I have never heard a single one say that.

[AX10]

75. Well, I've heard it over and over and also on this board too.

[SouthernDem2004]

77. Not from an Officer. Not once. There are 6 of us on here that I know of.

Not one of us has said such a thing.

[AX10]

78. Not True.

[SouthernDem2004]

79. Then give one example. Just one. Bet ya can not....

[AX10]

83. That is true.

Police have killed wrongfully too. I cry for those victims as well.

[noiretextatique]

53. it's not a generalization

there is a long and inglorius history of police abuse in certain communities and with certain people. an overkill incident of a black motocylcist started the riot watts riots, as did the acquittal of the cops in the rodney king case, coincidentally, also a black man, just like amadou diallo.

[AX10]

63. That is why I don't sympathize with some police too much. How can they..

blatently brutalize someone than get away with it?

[AX10]

82. Sadly, minorities don't get justice.

It's not fair. :argh:

[AX10]

30. I shed a tear so long as they are good people. I don't shed..

a tear if they are bad people because they don't deserve that type of respect. But I don't dance over their graves either. Afterall, I'm a Classic Liberal.

[seabeyond]

8. i have been noticing this automatic charge resisting arrest

with every one of these over the top tasering, or about anything else. i just cannot believe all these people are resisting arrest. my thought, and if true we should be informed. if we get angry, is the resisting arrest. if we say you are a jerk, is that resisting arrest. my thought, resisting arrest has changed in definition. we ought to know.

[ScamUSA.Com]

13. cops always overcharge.. they admit it

you can also be charge with assaulting a police officer for nothing

[AX10]

18. True. Someone had a quote from a Russian philospher...

regarding the horrors of "petty beaurocrats".

[SouthernDem2004]

56. Oh really? Who admits it?

Interesting claims... Anything to back it up or do we get the standard "I know a Cop and he said..." statement?

[LisaL]

6. At least they haven't declared him suspicious and shot him in the

head.