Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Those are the only two choices? Yeesh.
This is a false dilemma--the choices aren't "tase him or beat him senseless." If they were, then every time I meet a cop I have to obey every order he gives me or I'll be tased--and when that happens, I should be happy because he didn't beat me up with his nightstick. Sorry, that's not the society I live in.
I still haven't heard an answer to the most important question--how does the threat to public safety posed by naked dude outweigh the serious health and safety risk posed by taser use?
The assumption seems to be: "well, it's better than beating him up." But ordinarily, cops don't beat people up unless their behaviour is dangerous somehow. Naked guy wasn't all that dangerous. They wouldn't have beaten him up--that was my point. But taser use is okay? Why?
I'm just saying tasers aren't there to offer a convenient alternative to cops who don't feel like subduing a suspect by conventional means. I can tell I'm alone here, but I really feel like there's some tortured logic going on here.
|
Taser threads are always a good time.
Clearly you don't know the society you live in. What you do have to do is obey laws enforced by police.
Like it or not there are laws in most societies and they vary in reasonableness and seriousness. Cops don't make them, they just enforce them. If you are breaking one of them, regardless of whether there is a threat to public safety or not, should police look the other way and make that decision that this law is simply not reasonable? They do have discretion, but I would suggest it's a pretty slippery slope once you start making decisions like that, not to mention illegal.
Police have use of force models. At least the vast majority of WELL trained services do. That being said, every use of force option needs to be weighed, assessed and reassessed throughout an encounter. Taser use in this circumstance probably wasn't warranted in all models, but in my opinion, it's the LEAST violent of other less lethal tactics.
Clearly you don't understand police training. Fact is, tasers
are there as an alternative to subduing offenders through conventional means (I assume you mean a good ole' a$% kickin') and for the most part actually result in less injuries to both offenders and police.