Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The whole "feel good" premise that ALL Police should be disarmed, de-funded, kept out of situations involving black people, etc., is a knee-jerk, 'snowflake' escape from reality!
Sadly, our media and society seem to be headed down a road where everything is expected to be perfectly politically correct ... and subject to after-the-fact, hindsight judgment by mobs and protesters. The entire measure of truth or right/wrong in this environment seems to be 'appearances or perceptions' supported by brief, 'window-in-time,' I-phone pictures taken by "totally unbiased spectators."
The notion that tasers (and of course, more lethal, guns) should be "taken away" from police, is idiotic. Does one expect the criminal element to abide by the same rules? What's next, 'disarm our soldiers, because they might use lethal force on "innocent enemies?"
Of course, there are clearly instances where police over-react in the performance of their duty, just as there are some people who have a 'cowboy' mindset and probably shouldn't be on the police force. But, the streets and criminal element are uglier than many people care to acknowledge. Who do we want to replace the police?? (How about the 'snowflake militia' currently taking over the streets in Seattle??)
Just because a person gets shot or tased by the police, does not automatically make them an innocent 'choir boy'!... and the police the bad guy. Likewise, looting, vandalizing and burning the property of innocent civilians, doesn't make one a "free-speech, protester" either.
Maybe we should also get rid of judges and courts who don't seem 'politically correct' (aka: left-leaning), then we can return to 'Wild West America,' - where 'might makes right!' -- Many liberals already seem to think it's time for the police to find other employment and let the mobs and thugs rule the streets! America is heading down a dangerous road to anarchy! --
It's difficult to imagine why honest, decent people would still want to be policemen ...on this new, anti-police path
Due to the recent issue related to the Rayshad Brooks murder, should cops be barred from using tasers? The officer that shot Brooks said he feared for his life when Brooks got the officer's taser in his (Brooks') hand. Tasers were always looked at "safer" option rather than shooting an alleged suspect with a gun. It can't be both safe and unsafe if an officer fears for his and other's lives with it... It is one or the other.
Interesting alibi. Sounds like a pretty dumb cop. The same line that will get him off the hook when firearms are involved won't work if he's facing a threat from a taser.
I'm not sure I understand your topic question, OP. Are you saying, that because tasers are considered (at least by that one cop, supposedly) "lethal", they should be banned for LE use? What about guns, then? Are you suggesting cops shouldn't carry any potentially lethal weapons, only clubs, like in some Euro countries?
Interesting alibi. Sounds like a pretty dumb cop. The same line that will get him off the hook when firearms are involved won't work if he's facing a threat from a taser.
I'm not sure I understand your topic question, OP. Are you saying, that because tasers are considered (at least by that one cop, supposedly) "lethal", they should be banned for LE use? What about guns, then? Are you suggesting cops shouldn't carry any potentially lethal weapons, only clubs, like in some Euro countries?
The fact remains that you cannot say it is "safe" if even officers fear for their lives with the taser in play. If a taser is safe an officer shouldn't fear for his life if an alleged criminal grabbed his. As I said before if you punch and kick and officer in a way to away too. That of course didn't happen here sadly.
The fact remains that you cannot say it is "safe" if even officers fear for their lives with the taser in play. If a taser is safe an officer shouldn't fear for his life if an alleged criminal grabbed his. As I said before if you punch and kick and officer in a way to away too. That of course didn't happen here sadly.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I seriously doubt the officer feared for his life. IMO he gave that as the known legally acceptable excuse for using deadly force. I don't believe he feared for his life. He uses tasers enough in his line of work, and undoubtedly has seen his colleagues use them, to know that they're not dangerous, except perhaps as you say, in cases of people with heart conditions. If tasers were a form of deadly force, there would be no point in having them. The reason they were invented and adopted by police forces, is precisely because they're an alternative to the deadly force guns present; a non-deadly alternative.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I seriously doubt the officer feared for his life. IMO he gave that as the known legally acceptable excuse for using deadly force. I don't believe he feared for his life. He uses tasers enough in his line of work, and undoubtedly has seen his colleagues use them, to know that they're not dangerous, except perhaps as you say, in cases of people with heart conditions. If tasers were a form of deadly force, there would be no point in having them. The reason they were invented and adopted by police forces, is precisely because they're an alternative to the deadly force guns present; a non-deadly alternative.
The cop's story is transparently false.
They fired him and charged him because of public lynch mob. He'll be free and will be rewarded handsomely by the taxpayers when it goes to trial because any legal expert will tell you that what he did was completely by the book. When you are a trained officer you can be penalized for allowing a criminal to use your firearm. It is a higher duty to protect your firearm from a civilian and when a civilian crosses that line they are automatically within reason to be fired at.
So your reasoning does not align with the guidelines and training that officers must adhere to. It just sucks that he has to sick in jail awaiting for trial but he'll be free because it was on video and his bodycam.
The min anyone takes a weapon from a cop and points back, they will 9/10 times be fired at by a trained officer. In training they go through situations like that and in order to graduate cadet school they have to master subduing a suspect who points a weapon of any sort back.
So it wasn't very smart of the suspect to point a weapon back and any criminal knows if you dare to point back at a cop you had better be a professional shooter.
They fired him and charged him because of public lynch mob. He'll be free and will be rewarded handsomely by the taxpayers when it goes to trial because any legal expert will tell you that what he did was completely by the book.
And after he is freed, the anarchists will riot again. "Tear it all down, man."
The officer feared for his life because if he was stunned his gun could be taken off him and used against him.
Banning taser would just mean that shooting would be even more likely as there would be few non lethal alternatives.
As for non-lethal technology it is improving all the time and new devices are coming on to the market.
Taser will generally only incapacitate when hitting someone in the trunk.
It'll hurt like hell getting hit anywhere else, but most likely not to the level of incapacitation.
And that cop is sitting there with a bulletproof vest on that taser probes aren't going to make it through to hit him in the trunk.
I dunno.. I just find the whole "he could have tased me and taken my gun" thing to be along the lines of "He could have jumped in a car, started it and run me over, so I had to shoot him while he was sitting at his dinner table eating"
They fired him and charged him because of public lynch mob. He'll be free and will be rewarded handsomely by the taxpayers when it goes to trial because any legal expert will tell you that what he did was completely by the book. When you are a trained officer you can be penalized for allowing a criminal to use your firearm. It is a higher duty to protect your firearm from a civilian and when a civilian crosses that line they are automatically within reason to be fired at.
So your reasoning does not align with the guidelines and training that officers must adhere to. It just sucks that he has to sick in jail awaiting for trial but he'll be free because it was on video and his bodycam.
The min anyone takes a weapon from a cop and points back, they will 9/10 times be fired at by a trained officer. In training they go through situations like that and in order to graduate cadet school they have to master subduing a suspect who points a weapon of any sort back.
So it wasn't very smart of the suspect to point a weapon back and any criminal knows if you dare to point back at a cop you had better be a professional shooter.
This is 100% spot on. If I'm on a jury and LE fired upon a suspect due to them stealing a weapon while being placed under arrest, there's no way I hit that officer with murder charges. Suspect has a weapon and I have 1 second to figure out what to do before I find out what the suspect's going to do with their weapon. Shoot to kill. This is not the same as Minneapolis. LE is in the right here.
Tasers are a good alternative for the police to use. They should keep them. The worst of the police would love nothing more than to ditch the tasers and bring back their nightsticks.
And after he is freed, the anarchists will riot again. "Tear it all down, man."
It depends who's in power, if Trump is no longer president the media takes a much subdued approach to covering the sensitive news. Notice how the media likes to create reasons to riot whenever a Republican president is in the office. While Obama was president, the media kept so many police killings under wraps. That's why it built up so much anger for so many years because while Obama was president the media kept the dirty laundry clean. You don't hear any sensationalized story about police or politics. They kept Biden's corruption hidden even though NYTimes ran a story about it people didn't care. But the min that Trump did it, omg it was impeachable?
So the media is playing BLM and minorities as usual. There's nothing to celebrate for any side. People have lost lives unnecessarily to the riots all because the media and BLM groups wanted to create anarchy. That's why Trump won in 2016, the media silenced the conservatives for over a decade and that has resulted in Trump winning. Watch this election.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
