[ASLplease]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I don't think it'll be too long in the future that we conclude that police shouldn't be armed with tasers.

They've already tried rubber bullets and bean bags.

[EyeBrock]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I don't like cops having ANY nonlethal weapons. I think the only time a cop should use a weapon on someone is if it's a serious enough situation to warrant deadly force. That pretty much means the bad-guy better have a gun or a knife & and hostage. Otherwise, just form a circle and wait for more cops or let the guy go and get him later.

Yep, we should just shoot everybody, or form a circle....!

Simplistic and patently wrong.

[ASLplease]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I don't like cops having ANY nonlethal weapons. I think the only time a cop should use a weapon on someone is if it's a serious enough situation to warrant deadly force. That pretty much means the bad-guy better have a gun or a knife & and hostage. Otherwise, just form a circle and wait for more cops or let the guy go and get him later.

state troopers hold a handgun on you while they politely ask for your drivers licence. Is that warranted?

[Lemmy]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Yep, we should just shoot everybody, or form a circle....!

Simplistic and patently wrong.

Clearly I didn't mean that anyone should be shot, nor did I mean to LITERALLY form a circle. But I don't see it as the police force's job to take down aggitated people. Having a weapon, like tasers, means the cops are more likely to escalate the violence in a situation where they wouldn't have, had they had guns only.

As for your "simplistic" tag, we're pretty early on in this discussion for you to draw that conclusion yet. I haven't had a chance to expand or explain why I don't think cops should have tasers yet.

[Lemmy]

ASLplease ASLplease:

state troopers hold a handgun on you while they politely ask for your drivers licence. Is that warranted?

I don't live where there are state troopers (thank Christ), so I don't much care what they do.

[EyeBrock]

Lemmy Lemmy:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Yep, we should just shoot everybody, or form a circle....!

Simplistic and patently wrong.

Clearly I didn't mean that anyone should be shot, nor did I mean to LITERALLY form a circle. But I don't see it as the police force's job to take down aggitated people. Having a weapon, like tasers, means the cops are more likely to escalate the violence in a situation where they wouldn't have, had they had guns only.

As for your "simplistic" tag, we're pretty early on in this discussion for you to draw that conclusion yet. I haven't had a chance to expand or explain why I don't think cops should have tasers yet.

You will always need options in use-of-force. Non-lethal options save lives and stop injury to both suspects and police.
It's not up to the police to square up to a violent suspect at say a bar fight. The suspect who fails to comply can be pepper sprayed or tasered.

Without these options lethal force would be used far more frequently. I'm sorry Lemmy, the post about forming a circle and waiting for more cops to come is simplistic at best.

Resources are finite and the police are having to make do with the staffing they have and the equipment they have.

The rules surrounding the use of lethal force are simple. It is justified only in cases where there is a threat of serious bodily harm or death to a person.

[Lemmy]

Yeah, I understand your point. Mine is that use of force should be a last resort and I see the taser as encouraging force where it's not needed. In the case of someone in a bar fight, there's NO reason to use force unless the fight is on-going. In that case, physical intervention would work fine (just like hockey linesmen). If a bar-fight suspect fails to comply, then wait him out. He'll relax after a while, which is what I meant by "forming a circle". The cops should need a much better reason than "He didn't comply" to use force, IMHO.

[EyeBrock]

In theory that seems like a resonable idea. In practice any situation that involves violence can turn deadly pretty quickly. The hockey analogy doesn't really work when people are drunk and there are weapons of opportunity, such as bottles and glasses all over the place.
Bar fights are a very dangerous environment.
The taser's laser light has curtailed many a bar fight. People don't like red dots on their chests. Many times that's all that is need and the taser isn't deployed.

The idea is to stop the behaviour and sometimes that means taser, pepper spray etc.
There are set parameters for using force and it is totally up to the suspect on the level of force used. I'll try and dig up the 'use-of-force' model that is used coast to coast. Any use of force has to be justified according to this model whic is regulary used in court.

The taser has been an invaluable tool but there has been mis-use.
That mis-use has been down to bad training and bad judgement.
Both are areas that are actively being addressed.

It will be pretty easy to see if those tasers on the original post were used 24 times. Every time the taser is used an electronic record of time of use, length of 'spark' and number of times it was used.
This can be down-loaded and provides accountability of the weapons use.
Those cops best be able to justify it's use if it was activated more than 2 or 3 times.

[Lemmy]

I still disagree with you, but you make a compelling argument.

[EyeBrock]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I still disagree with you, but you make a compelling argument.

I must be convincing! Cheers Lemmy!

[StuntmanMike]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, I understand your point. Mine is that use of force should be a last resort and I see the taser as encouraging force where it's not needed. In the case of someone in a bar fight, there's NO reason to use force unless the fight is on-going. In that case, physical intervention would work fine (just like hockey linesmen). If a bar-fight suspect fails to comply, then wait him out. He'll relax after a while, which is what I meant by "forming a circle". The cops should need a much better reason than "He didn't comply" to use force, IMHO.

Sorry, but police officers have a sworn obligation to keep the peace and protect life and property. Imagine a scenario where police officers responded to a bar fight, then proceeded to stand back and "wait it out" while two drunken louts proceeded to smash up the place and kick the shit out of people. The public would quite rightly call for their badges.

[Dayseed]

StuntmanMike StuntmanMike:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, I understand your point. Mine is that use of force should be a last resort and I see the taser as encouraging force where it's not needed. In the case of someone in a bar fight, there's NO reason to use force unless the fight is on-going. In that case, physical intervention would work fine (just like hockey linesmen). If a bar-fight suspect fails to comply, then wait him out. He'll relax after a while, which is what I meant by "forming a circle". The cops should need a much better reason than "He didn't comply" to use force, IMHO.

Sorry, but police officers have a sworn obligation to keep the peace and protect life and property. Imagine a scenario where police officers responded to a bar fight, then proceeded to stand back and "wait it out" while two drunken louts proceeded to smash up the place and kick the shit out of people. The public would quite rightly call for their badges.

Good point Stuntman, one which I echoed back when the RCMP tasered the Polish man at the Vancouver airport. Be warned though, sticking up for the police on this site usually runs you afoul of the peace-niks. It's gotten better since the forum's biggest resident wannabe-cop idiot Motorcycleboy left...he usually just inflamed the public against him...all the while claiming he had an orb of intelligence.

It was weird.

[monstar_13]

Yes they were tasered 24+ times, they were only in the room for less than 20 minutes and then fell asleep, until all HELL broke loose and these "professional" police officers threw them to the floor and assaulted them both all because they decided to not drink and drive after coming from a club in downtown toronto. neither of them have any offensive or defensive marks on their bodies... the only marks on anyone are of the officers inflicting injury and assault on the two young men who were sleeping... They were also briefed that there were no weapons involved as this bust...they had tape regarding a male and his girlfriend...this room had been under surveillance all day by these officers... now how would these two young men know this as they were both at work all day and all week only arriving in the room less than 20 minuates before the raid... yes this is police brutality and excessive force... that is why they were charged with obstruct...as the judge said they didn't wake up fast enough. Yes you PROM renting young people this could be you TOO!! You TEA people having TEA with your next door neighbour make sure you know what they have been doing all day before you visit...this is happening a lot more than you think here in Canada!!!! We are becoming a POLICE STATE!!!!! Happens a lot why do you think the media waited so long to print this one...they have had many calls on police misconduct but this one is surreal...COPS GONE BAD!!!!!!

[monstar_13]

Please note the police involved originally only stated that they had tasered one of the men 3 times to later on change there statements to at least 12... its ironic that they admitted to 3 times and he said that he only remembered being tasered 3 times... which should indicate that he was obviously unconscious for the remaining number of times he was tatsered. This goes to show that these officers equipped with this "DEADLY' weapon are most definatly not afraid to use it excessivly on anyone even someone who is sleeping...who is not posing a threat to themselves the public or anyone else. This leaves a big question WHAT WERE THESE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE?!?!?!

[monstar_13]

As I was in the courtroom the judge stated that they did not wake up fast enough for the Officers and that is why "Obstruct"...they did not wake up fast enough...you cant arrest someone for just being asleep somewhere where an earlier crime had taken place...and they had no drugs in their system...they went to a club to celebrate a birthday and were offered a couch to sleep to avoid drinking and driving as a lot of other friends can attest too that were at the club and were with them as well...these are nice guys and this should never have happened...but obviously it can happen and right here in Canada...law enforcement can brutilize and terrorize Canadians and get away with it and Citizens will actually rally around Law Enforcement and this type of behaviour...what kind of a country have we become...they were found not guilty of anything the trial took 10 mins...this could have been anyone...if you or I had assaulted someone we would be standing trial right now...they are no different...they are Public Employees...so be careful what you wish for...we are becoming known by the rest of the world as a military state...this is definitely another coverup...PEOPLE (CANADIANS) WAKEUP!!!!!!!!!!