Another "Taser-wielding RCMP officer"

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Laugh. Yes boss.

I'm constantly insinuating nothing. It sounds to me like this cop used excessive force. It happens. Or doesn't it?

You're insinuating the cop used excessive force, however, when I brought up a hypothetical scenario you responded with "we don't know all the details".

Of course cops can use excessive force, there is no need for patronizing comments of that nature in this thread. Do you want to have a serious discussion or are you just out to make assumptions about cops using excessive force when by your own admission we don't have all the details in front of us?

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

As it has been said, physically handling someone is what they did before tasers came along. (No they didn't give one warning and then shoot). Police officers knew what they were signing up for, they get paid for it. I hope they all took a pay cut when tasers were introduced now that their job is that much easier.

They dont give a warning when they are about to taser someone? I think that's incorrect. They give ample warning to allow the suspect to surrender.

As for taking a pay cut... come on.

[JohnnyFlame]

As is always said within the arguments on radar traps -- don't want a ticket/trouble with the police -- then hey don't break the law.

Don't speed and you don't get a ticket.

Don't break the law and you won't get manhandled, tasered or shot.

Now I do think radar traps are nothing more than a cash grab and do nothing in terms of public safety but there is some logic in the those two arguments.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

They dont give a warning when they are about to taser someone? I think that's incorrect. They give ample warning to allow the suspect to surrender.

As for taking a pay cut... come on.

I think you misunderstood. It was mentioned earlier that police used to give someone one warning, and if they did not comply, they shot them. Which didn't happen. I'm sure they give ample warning before a tasing.

Yes, taking a pay cut is ridiculous, but in my opinion so is tasering a 68-year old man delivering papers with his wife, "car chase" or not. I agree, this dude is ######ed (legally?) and there should be consequences, but tasering? Come on...

[Metro Gnome]

A cop tasers a 68 year old man over a parking ticket issue, and people are coming out in favor of the cop? Wholly crap. We really are 2 steps away from a Nazi state aren't we? Submit to martial authority! THIS IS FOR YOUR PROTECTION! We're a mere stone's throw away from "Well that pregnant woman shouldn't have mouthed off like that."

A cop's job is tough and potentially dangerous, sure. But that doesn't give him the right to supersede other people's given rights. If you and I have an arguement over something, I don't have the authority to tase you. And there's a reason for that. Force in response to force. Force for self-defense. Not "force because I don't think he listened to me." or "force because there's a possibility that the doddering old man might pose a threat to me." The fact that the police have the monopoly of "legitimate" force in our society means we should all be vigilant against any abuses of that power.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

You're insinuating the cop used excessive force, however, when I brought up a hypothetical scenario you responded with "we don't know all the details".

Of course cops can use excessive force, there is no need for patronizing comments of that nature in this thread. Do you want to have a serious discussion or are you just out to make assumptions about cops using excessive force when by your own admission we don't have all the details in front of us?

Oh please. Spare me the indignation. There have been so many goddamn hypothetical scenarios in this thread I don't know if we are talking about the "PAPER BOY CAPER" or someone's imagination. There doesn't seem to be much separation between the two.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

I think you misunderstood. It was mentioned earlier that police used to give someone one warning, and if they did not comply, they shot them. Which didn't happen. I'm sure they give ample warning before a tasing.

Yes, taking a pay cut is ridiculous, but in my opinion so is tasering a 68-year old man delivering papers with his wife, "car chase" or not. I agree, this dude is ######ed (legally?) and there should be consequences, but tasering? Come on...

Thank you for clarifying.

You have to put yourself into the RCMP officers shoes even though we dont have all the facts. From what we did know, he did not accept a ticket, started to drive away, stopped, got out of his vehicle. At that point it becomes hazy. If he walked towards the police officer and did not respond to requests to stop, then absolutely the RCMP officer could tase him. If the cop rushed him and tased him when he got out of the vehicle, I still think we give the benefit of the doubt to the cop. How did he know he wasnt getting out to shoot him (in light of other RCMP incidents in the past 6 months)?

The RCMP officer does not know this guy is missing a few screws. It is infact irrelevant.

There will be an investigation and most likely (as in other recent taser incidents the media got a hold of) the cop will be found to have acted appropriately.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

A cop tasers a 68 year old man over a parking ticket issue, and people are coming out in favor of the cop? Wholly crap. We really are 2 steps away from a Nazi state aren't we? Submit to martial authority! THIS IS FOR YOUR PROTECTION! We're a mere stone's throw away from "Well that pregnant woman shouldn't have mouthed off like that."

Did you happen to read 1984 recently?

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

A cop's job is tough and potentially dangerous, sure. But that doesn't give him the right to supersede other people's given rights. If you and I have an arguement over something, I don't have the authority to tase you. And there's a reason for that. Force in response to force. Force for self-defense. Not "force because I don't think he listened to me." or "force because there's a possibility that the doddering old man might pose a threat to me." The fact that the police have the monopoly of "legitimate" force in our society means we should all be vigilant against any abuses of that power.

It actually does. We invest police officers with the ability to supercede other citizens rights when, in their opinion, it is reasonable to do so. Arresting, stopping vehicles for traffic violations, etc... are examples.

I agree that society should be vigilant against abuses of power. I think we do a pretty good job of that and if the cop did act inappropriately, there are steps in place to deal with him.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

A car chase? Jesus Christ, the cop probably wasn't even in his car by the time the guy stopped. It was a parking ticket.

You people are turning this Senior Citizen/Paper Boy into John Dillnger for crying out loud.

You don't think someone getting in their vehicle and driving away from the RCMP isn't a big deal? Yeah, the guy only went one block before he realized it was a bad idea, but what happens if he doesn't? It obviously wasn't a danger at that point, but the fact that the guy actually got in his vehicle and took off isn't a major red flag for you?

I'm sure if you did the same thing the next time you got a speeding ticket the cops would be very impressed and wouldn't think it's a big deal at all.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You people are turning this Senior Citizen/Paper Boy into John Dillnger for crying out loud.

Ironically enough... Chuck Norris is also 68, but I doubt anyone in this thread would blink if Norris had to be subdued with the help of 5 officers, pepper spray and a couple of taser jolts.

(Clearly the man is not Chuck Norris, but you see my point).

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

A car chase? Jesus Christ, the cop probably wasn't even in his car by the time the guy stopped. It was a parking ticket.

You people are turning this Senior Citizen/Paper Boy into John Dillnger for crying out loud.

Without addressing off the wall comments like this, lets look at the Use of Force model of the RCMP. I did a quick google search and here it is.

Calgary uses a similar model and the vast majority of models used throughout Canada are also similar. The taser itself is not listed but would be considered an 'intermediate weapon' and as you can see, it CAN be deployed in a variety of situations. What needs to be pointed out is:
a) How fluid the model is. Meaning different levels of force can be used on different subject categories. ie. Intermediate weapons can be used on death/GBH, combative and resistant subjects. There is nothing set in stone that says one must use this technique for this situation. Related,
b) Each officer has a different threshold for using force. While one officer might elect to use open hand techniques, another might elect to use a taser. It doesn't make any officer WRONG or EXCESSIVE.

Related, I would think that as a drafter has a favorite pencil or a carpenter has a favorite hammer, police probably have favorites when justified. One officer might feel confident in his/her empty hand techniques and thus uses them more, while another prefers OC spray. Either way, based on the use of force model, they must be able to articulate their use of force.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

A cop tasers a 68 year old man over a parking ticket issue, and people are coming out in favor of the cop? Wholly crap.

It's not a parking ticket issue.

It's a getting in your vehicle and driving away from an RCMP officer issue.

Like I said, the next time you get a speeding ticket just drive away from the officer before he hands you the ticket. They shouldn't mind - it's not a big deal at all...

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Related,
b) Each officer has a different threshold for using force. While one officer might elect to use open hand techniques, another might elect to use a taser. It doesn't make any officer WRONG or EXCESSIVE.

Related, I would think that as a drafter has a favorite pencil or a carpenter has a favorite hammer, police probably have favorites when justified. One officer might feel confident in his/her empty hand techniques and thus uses them more, while another prefers OC spray. Either way, based on the use of force model, they must be able to articulate their use of force.

Good post Bent Wookie. An officers discretion is critical and gives them the necessary leeway to protect themselves without being worried about George Orwell fans criticizing them.

[jar_e]

I see everybody mentioning the "68 year old" bit...would anyone view this differently if it was a 16 year old? 20? 35? 50? 100?

Food for thought...

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by JayP

It's not a parking ticket issue.

It's a getting in your vehicle and driving away from an RCMP officer issue.

Like I said, the next time you get a speeding ticket just drive away from the officer before he hands you the ticket. They shouldn't mind - it's not a big deal at all...

Solution sounds pretty simple. Stop you vehicle and accept your ticket. Presto no incident. Don't compound breaking the law by further breaking the law!! Don't see how the cop haters get around that one.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Burninator

I'll echo what Rouge said. Who said he was coming after him? Raising your hands is not coming after someone.

Its already been mentioned several times. The old man's wife's comments. He's not going to be "fighting him off" if he is in a surrender pose.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I see everybody mentioning the "68 year old" bit...would anyone view this differently if it was a 16 year old? 20? 35? 50? 100?

Food for thought...

Yes. The age is quite relevant to me.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Solution sounds pretty simple. Stop you vehicle and accept your ticket. Presto no incident. Don't compound breaking the law by further breaking the law!! Don't see how the cop haters get around that one.

Not many people are arguing that this guy deserves no punishment. Just not a tasering.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

Yes. The age is quite relevant to me.

Not to me, a 68 year old is just as capable of pulling a gun or knife as a 16 year old.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Burninator

What's with all this gun talk? I don't see how this relevant at all. From the article there is nothing indicating that he attempted to reach for anything or any indication that he was concealing a weapon. The police don't operate under the assumption that everyone might have a gun, otherwise they would have theirs drawn all the time. Plus for a 68 year old the likelihood for him having a gun would be extremely low.

BS. Cops have to suspect this all the time. I remember getting pulled over one day about 6 years ago. I was sure that the cop was pulling me over because I had a faulty left signal light. I wanted to go open my trunk and fix it. The second I stepped out of the car, he put his hand on his gun and demanded that I stop.

At the time, I thought he was over reacting. In retrospect, he was doing exactly what he should have done. What if I had proceeded? He pulls out a weapon. And if proceed more? He has to assume that for whatever reason I'm not afraid of his weapon and that there is a reason for that.


I think some of you guys live in a dream world where bad things are always forseeable for cops. They have to expect the unexpected and be on high alert for their entire shift, everytime they work.