Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Out of the Blue

Go big blue! I hope Ronde Barber enjoys watching next week's game from the comfort of his living room.

Winning Links! Thanks Ant and Mike Martinez.
Link of the Morning: The Nietzsche Family Circus. Thanks Hump.
Stories: 10 mph motorway driver given ban. Thanks Neatorama. I've been behind her.
Hidden Room, Hidden Danger.
McDonald's coffee bars to take on Starbucks: report.
Science: G.M. to Show a Vehicle That Drives by Itself. Hopefully faster than 10 mph.
Economists Say Movie Violence Might Temper the Real Thing.
Issue May Really Be How Far Players Will Go to Gain an Advantage. Thanks for clarifying.
Media: One reason to eat pudding: Shatner eats it. Here's another.
Follow-up: WGA signs deal with United Artists.

View
16. Re: No subject Jan 7, 2008, 23:05 Fang
 
I have close family members who also serve, so don't get me wrong. I strongly support our police officers. However, my point is about training on deciding when to use force.

You can. Period. You have to remember, you taser the person for a reason.

No, an officer can't just taser someone walking down the street without identifying himself and for no other cause other than he was having a bad day. There are consequences, just like any other instrument of force such as a baton.

My point was focusing on the proper reasons to use force.

Why? Because someone with a pre-existing heart condition who would normally be able to live out their life just fine, but 10 taser shocks in a row would put them into cardiac arrest, then maybe the guy with the taser caused their death?

Otherwise, that's like saying guns don't kill people, blood loss does.

My point is that the bar of when to use force should not become lower just because there is a perception that there are no consequences. You don't know everyone's medical condition, so it is important to follow proper training in deciding when its necessary to use force.

I agree when force is necessary, I think tasers are great and have probably saved many lives.

For example, this officer was suspended for this incident:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avFLFN3UY0g
He tasered the driver 45 seconds after pulling him over (for going 5 mph over the limit, the rear license plate is in the back window). He didn't give the driver time to obey his orders before tasering him.

And most departments have policies that officers should lean against tasering the really old and really young. Policies and training are there for a reason, it's important to follow them. That's all I'm saying.

 
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
    Date Subject Author
  1. Jan 7, 11:51 No subject xXBatmanXx
  13. Jan 7, 17:38  Re: No subject Fang
  14. Jan 7, 17:45   Re: No subject xXBatmanXx
>> 16. Jan 7, 23:05    Re: No subject Fang
  2. Jan 7, 12:01 No subject strich
  3. Jan 7, 12:39 Ronde wasn't really wrong... Devster
  6. Jan 7, 14:53  Re: Ronde wasn't really wrong...  Blue 
  15. Jan 7, 19:18   Re: Ronde wasn't really wrong... bjack
  4. Jan 7, 14:29 No subject strich
  5. Jan 7, 14:36  Re: No subject xXBatmanXx
  9. Jan 7, 15:42  Re: No subject nin
  10. Jan 7, 15:51   Re: No subject kanniballl
  11. Jan 7, 16:27    Re: No subject Narf2029
  7. Jan 7, 15:27 10 MPH Driver kanniballl
  8. Jan 7, 15:29  Re: 10 MPH Driver Armengar
  12. Jan 7, 17:05   Re: 10 MPH Driver Jim
  17. Jan 7, 23:14 No subject xXBatmanXx
  18. Jan 7, 23:37  Re: No subject Fang
  19. Jan 9, 02:41   Re: No subject Armengar


footer

Blue's News logo