There was never a report of this man threatening anyone. Would it be okay if they blew his house apart because they might have heard someone saying he was the Green Goblin?
Sorry, that's not my job. That's one of the reasons I chose not to be a cop, so I wouldn't have to deal with such situations. They CHOSE to be a cop and they CHOSE to put their life on the line. They don't get a free pass when they fail or when they break the law just because their job is high-stress and dangerous.and you show up , you are a bit nervous because you never know when someone who hates cops --like most of this board---
is going to end your life....
Perhaps I would, perhaps I would not. I cannot conclusively state what I would do, given that I have never been put in that situation. I personally do not believe I would ever seek out a man in his own home who might be suicidal, intentionally escalate the situation, and then taze him.then YOU would probably use a taser to handcuff a guy and SEARCH that couch to make sure there is NOT a weapon that will end your life---
Don't like the unfortunate fact that being a cop is dangerous? Don't be a cop. Simple.
Oh, it's already been gotten.get it?
Using this line of defense, no cop has ever been in the wrong for any kind of physical confrontation. Any person at any point "may or may not be armed". I "may or may not be armed" sitting at this desk, that does not suddenly give a cop free reign to bust down my office door and threaten to arrest me.no-one's human rights have been violated if a police officer was summoned for help and there is a man who may or may not be armed and is acting a bit
erratic...
Complete conjecture.then no-one's rights are violated
I understand that using this as justification basically gives cops the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, under the guise of, "we got a report" and "the situation could have been life-threatening".it is a possibly dangerous and unstable scene which could--at any given moment---turn deadly
understand?
You keep talking about wanting evidence that the police did something wrong, yet you are going so far out of your way to dream up ways in which this slow moving old man with a heart condition was lying in wait for police to show up so he could pull out a bazooka and end them.
I mean, if he's so armed and dangerous, why not send in SWAT? , land a helicopter on his out and dispatch SEAL operatives into his home. It's life and death when an old man comes home from a charity fundraiser with a little too much wine in him!
Which is exactly why police officers are educated and trained before being sent out into the force. Education and training are meant to subvert knee-jerk fight or flight instincts and allow an officer to remain calm and collected so that he doesn't ever need to use physical force... or the need to enter someone's home without cause.
Any other cliches you want to roll out in this thread?Oh now that is rich...
All you tough talking trolls, sitting in the safety of your parent’s garage…
The next time you need the help of our police…Call a pot smoking hippie…
Keep going, youre failing gracefully.
Again,There was never a report of this man threatening anyone. Would it be okay if they blew his house apart because they might have heard someone saying he was the Green Goblin?
Sorry, that's not my job. That's one of the reasons I chose not to be a cop, so I wouldn't have to deal with such situations. They CHOSE to be a cop and they CHOSE to put their life on the line. They don't get a free pass when they fail or when they break the law just because their job is high-stress and dangerous.
Perhaps I would, perhaps I would not. I cannot conclusively state what I would do, given that I have never been put in that situation. I personally do not believe I would ever seek out a man in his own home who might be suicidal, intentionally escalate the situation, and then taze him.
Don't like the unfortunate fact that being a cop is dangerous? Don't be a cop. Simple.
Oh, it's already been gotten.
Using this line of defense, no cop has ever been in the wrong for any kind of physical confrontation. Any person at any point "may or may not be armed". I "may or may not be armed" sitting at this desk, that does not suddenly give a cop free reign to bust down my office door and threaten to arrest me.
Complete conjecture.
I understand that using this as justification basically gives cops the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, under the guise of, "we got a report" and "the situation could have been life-threatening".
You keep talking about wanting evidence that the police did something wrong, yet you are going so far out of your way to dream up ways in which this slow moving old man with a heart condition was lying in wait for police to show up so he could pull out a bazooka and end them.
I mean, if he's so armed and dangerous, why not send in SWAT? , land a helicopter on his out and dispatch SEAL operatives into his home. It's life and death when an old man comes home from a charity fundraiser with a little too much wine in him!
Which is exactly why police officers are educated and trained before being sent out into the force. Education and training are meant to subvert knee-jerk fight or flight instincts and allow an officer to remain calm and collected so that he doesn't ever need to use physical force... or the need to enter someone's home without cause.
I see your points and some of where you are coming from, but at this point we don't even know WHY the police were there
so we are kinda just pissin' in the wind arent we?
They could have been there legally and acted in a completely reasonable way for the kind of call they responded to.
Or
they could have been there with NO CAUSE and acted like total jerks
but we don't know any of that do we?
You, yourself just stated that they CHOSE this job---so they get no pass...
fair enough.
In the next paragraph---you stated that you could not conclusively state what you would or would not do?
Why?
maybe because it is difficult to make the perfect call when you are put in a possibly dangerous situation and there is a camera running and you are not sure if there is or if there is not a gun behind the old man...
and you don't know if he is dangerous, stupid, or both?
and you have asked the old guy to go with you to the hospital and get him some help and he said you
then he says he is going to use a gun to off himself--but then later he said it was just
hyperbole...
and you can't really state conclusively what you would or would not do because if you chose the wrong action
maybe there would be some a-holes out in the civilian world---maybe on some forum or board
just arm-chair quarter-backing whatever decision you HAD to make in the heat of the moment to possibly save your life...
maybe
it is easy to sit here
after the fact and just hate on cops because you just don't like them---regardless of what they do or don't do
you just made up your mind somewhere along the line that cops are just out to people over and violate their rights.....
maybe
and the slow moving old man part
ok
do you think that that slow moving old man was strong enough to pull a trigger?
I would rather tase an old man and deal with the consequences
than have my family bury me young because some crazy in lunatic decided to not take his meds and just happened to have an episode and end my life...
just sayin'
The fundamental difference here is that you automatically want to rush to the defense of the aggressors.
I prefer to stick up for civil rights and the individual. You know, it kinda goes with that whole, "Innocent until proven guilty" thing. Plus, I believe that anytime a cop uses force, he should be able to show without a shadow of a doubt how, when, and why, and to show he was absolutely justified in using force.
It should be a cop's last resort to hurt someone. I saw no threat from the man, no intent to injure or endanger the lives of the officers, I saw nothing that this man did wrong, and since he was not found guilty of a crime, I don't know how you can possibly make all these hyperbolic assumptions on your own. The guy, according to you, was waving a gun and threatening to kill people/himself, was swearing and causing a public disturbance...
... yet he hasn't been charged with a single crime. Pretty incredible, if you ask me.
No one mentioned paramedics, quit with the strawman. I know your position is weak, but please.one crime and you found your own car, your Batman!
hopefully you dont fall off a cliff (get shot, ran over, etc) and need the cops/paramedics help's because by your logic you will send them away.
I hope your logic extends to everything, since apparently anything an officer does is justified because you call them help.
Don't complain about your teacher smoking in class, otherwise teach your kid yourself.
Don't complain if the computer IT guy belittles you, otherwise fix your computer yourself.
Don't complain if your waiter spits in your food, or make it yourself.
Don't complain if your doctor fondles you, treat yourself.
#1)
I am not automatically rushing to anyone's defense. I am stating that we really don't know exactly who called the cops--but someone apparently did. We don't know what was said when the old man threatened to use a gun on himself--I did speculate that--maybe-- the old man threaten to use the gun on himself and possibly others. We still don't know.
#2)
Anytime a cop uses force....
do you know or understand that if a cop had to show ---beyond the shadow of a doubt as you say--
why he acted the way he did---that cops would be killed every single day all over the USA?
If you tell a guy to keep his hands up and he reaches inside his pocket---what do you do?
Wait until he pulls out a glock and shoot you because you have to know ---beyond a shadow of a doubt that he had a glock --for sure---not just a comb that he was going to use to comb his hair.
How would cops know? They have to use their judgement---and of course--
everyone wants to fry any cop who uses questionable judgement.
#3)
The cops did use force as a last resort---they never drew a firearm did they?
They tried talking to him for 5 minutes didn't they?
The tazer is not a deadly force weapon---it is an intermediate weapon.
Has anyone here stopped to think that maybe the paramedics were treating the old guy and THEY heard him say that he was going to kill himself and maybe the paramedics--called for the police?
It makes sense that a paramedic would --by law-- be FORCED to try and get the old man some help. It sounds to me as though both the paramedics and the police were doing their jobs in trying to prevent this old man from turning his threats into action and may have possibly saved his life?
If not, who called for the police?
Answer that and then you may find out why the police felt that they HAD to take him into custody.
It is like if you get arrested and get locked up in jail---and you use ---hyperbole--
to say that you are going to kill yourself in your cell....
what do you think will happen?
I will tell you what will happen.
You will be stripped of your clothes and you will be placed -- whether you want to or not-- in a rubber room--buck naked...until you are seen by a shrink.
Sure, you can say you were just kidding---but it is too in' late---you FORCED the officers to do something to protect YOU---because god forbid you DO hang yourself with your pants and t-shirt...then the whole world will say
why didn't the pigs stop him from hangin himself????
Jesus.
The only thing more absurd than the video is the argument in this thread.
This
thread
is
annoying
as
to
read.
You DO know that reading it is VOLUNTARY , right?
Stop reading it then.
I still don't understand how the police officer was trying to achieve his goal of getting the old man medical attention through tasing him. That seems to be counter-productive.
Maybe.
The police officer had determined (I don't know how he determined this---but something happened during the five minutes that we DON'T see to make the officer to make this decision) that he was going to have to arrest the old man.
Once a police officer has decided to arrest you--then the next steps are just logical and are standard police protocol.
First, he will tell you that you are under arrest.
Then he will ASK you to place your hands behind your back to be handcuffed--so that you can be transported to a detention facility.
If you comply---end of story--you are handcuffed and read your rights after being handcuffed and then transported peacefully to the detention center.
No one will hurt you or abuse you.
If, on the other hand, you refuse to cooperate, then other steps have to be taken. It can be more talking. It can progress to being ordered. Maybe if that doesn't work---then you will be warned, leading to a warning of being tased,etc...
all of these steps become more and more serious....you DO have a choice as to how difficult it will be and if you will be tased or shot or whatever---ALL depending on YOUR actions.
A police officer prefers, of course, to make it easy.
IF ---as a lot of people seem to think---
IF the officers are being abusive,assaultive, reckless or are just plain wrong...
There will be a time and a place for you to seek justice---if your rights have been trampled...
but the arrest scene is NOT where you want to fight this battle...
you will have your day in court---you just have to be smart and not put yourself in a situation where you get your ass beat,tased and generally---humiliated...
Back to the officer making the determination to arrest the old man---
that is the whole key to this...
did the officer act LAWFULLY in determining to make an arrest
or did the officer arrest this person UNLAWFULLY
they will get to the bottom of this I am sure.
We do know they used excessive force. They should be fired and the old man should only get "paid" for any injuries that occured durning the arrest.
People hating on cops are so lame. There are far more good cops than bad and you only hear about things like this because it is more interesting than the thousands of legitimate stops and arrests for people doing bad things.
I can easily see how racism is such a problem with thinking like this. Taking a small percentage and extrapolating it to everyone.
This is why everyone should not be allowed to vote.
It was directed in general to those lamenting the cops. Sure, there is an at ude problem, but their job is mediocre pay, high stress, dangerous and under appreciated.
There are at ude problems in every field (IT, Government, Medical...).
I said it is mediocre, not terrible.
Ok, well most cops (that I know of) don't make 75K. But that is semantics at this point and really is not the point of what I was saying.
My brother in law has been a cop for 8+ years so far and he made just under 100k. This is with over time though which pays 2 times and half, not just time and a half.... ain't that some .
The academy pays around 29k'ish, rookie year is around 35k'ish with incremental raises every year along with inflation raises. You get FULL health/eye/dental coverage for yourself, spouse, and up to I believe 6-8 dependents. he get's $200 a year just for sunglasses. He makes a good living. You get even more by going to school(which they pay for it all) and having a degree for anything.
He also isn't a saint as all the stories he tells me BUT he doesn't mess with good people ie; old man in video. He only messes with real criminals that really deserve it. He's never tazered anyone even though he should have a lot of times. He just beats the out of them with his custom made hardwood club.
they told him several times to get up and he refused. when he got up, they thought he was attacking them.
Analysis: Taser-related deaths in US accelerating
By Daniel Tencer
The rate of deaths in Taser-related incidents is rising as police forces increasingly adapt the conducted energy weapons, a Raw Story analysis finds.
A 2008 report (PDF) from Amnesty International found 351 Taser-related deaths in the US between June, 2001 and August, 2008, a rate of just slightly above four deaths per month.
A database of Taser-related deaths maintained at the African-American issues blog Electronic Village counts 96 deaths related to the use of Tasers since January, 2009.
Assuming the statistics are correct, that indicates the death rate has increased to an average of five per month.
Electronic Village counts the 96th Taser-linked death as being that of Adam Colliers, a 25-year-old resident of Snohomish County, Washington, who was reportedly "running up and down" a street and causing a disturbance when he was Tased by two officers. He stopped breathing shortly afterwards, and was pronounced dead in hospital a short while later.
Story continues below...
It was the second Taser-related death, and the fifth death in a police encounter, in the Seattle area over the past week.
Truth Not Tasers, which maintains an extensive list of deaths linked to conducted energy weapons going back to the 1980s, says Colliers is the 507th person in the US to die in incidents linked to the weapons.
Electronic Village reports that Tasers "are now deployed in law enforcement agencies in 29 of the 33 largest US cities."
But, the blog notes, "the tide may be turning."
As taser-related deaths and injuries have continued to rise (as well as the amount of Taser litigation), many departments are starting to abandon the weapon in favor of other means of suspect control. Currently, Memphis, Tennessee, San Francisco, California, and Las Vegas, Nevada have opted to ban the use of tasers by law enforcement. Additionally, a federal court has ruled (PDF) that the pain inflicted by the taser gun cons utes excessive force by law enforcement. The courts don't want police to electrocute people with their tasers unless they pose an immediate threat.
Amnesty International notes that efforts to determine the lethality of Tasers are being frustrated by the weapon's manufacturer, Taser International.
"Medical studies so far on the effects of Tasers have either been limited in scope or unduly influenced by the weapons' primary manufacturer," the group states.
"Given the unresolved safety concerns, Amnesty International recommends that police departments either suspend the use of Tasers and stun guns pending further safety research or limit their use to situations where officers would otherwise be justified in resorting to firearms," Amnesty says.
============
Cigarette execs say smoking doesn't cause cancer or disease,
Taser execs say Tasers are not lethal.
Pretty weak sources, to be honest.
Never heard of those publications and there is no mention of HOW were these deaths RELATED to a taser.
There could be other reasons why those people died---and may not have anything to do with the tasers.
Are you aware that police officers get tased when they qualify with a taser?
Most actually volunteer to get tased when they go back the next year to re-qualify.
It is only a temporary shock that stuns you very,very briefly and then---just like that---it is over.
It may appear to be brutal but it is actually not that bad.
The main purpose is to temporarily stun a suspect---just briefly to place handcuffs on their wrists and to avoid further violence and further actions like having to shoot someone.
Stop being drama queens and make a choice----
EITHER SHUT THE UP---COMPLY WITH A DIRECT ORDER AND STOP RESISTING ARREST
OR TAKE THE TASE LIKE A IN MAN.
PUSSIES!
They didn't have any reason to be there after he told them to off. And the extra taser action was completely unnecessary.
Again?
The old prick had already opened his piehole and either made a threat or let it out that he was suicidal.
If he didn't want the hassle---he should have kept his in hole shut.
You can't say like that in the presence of paramedics or police officers who are bound by law to save lives--and then just change your mind.
Too in late. The old man got what he deserved. Shoulda kept tasing him til he his pants and shut the up.
Pretty basic situation in this video.
Man said something he should not have.
Police gave him instructions for around 5 minutes and when the suspect did not comply, the officers followed thru with their warnings.
The man should have complied with the officers.
I also believe the man needs to be charged with resisting arrest and needs to be subject to a heavy fine and probation or jail time.
When will you ignorant s learn to obey the police? They are the enforcement is society.
DO. NOT. . WITH. A. POLICE. OFFICER. OR. YOU. WILL. BE. HURT.
well amidst all this one thing is for certain - silver is a ty troll.
+ infinity
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
