Ontario man tazed, dies

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Swarly

there is a big difference between being young and drunk belligerent and high out of your mind swinging objects at people in the public belligerent.

But that's exactly my point. Cops are using them in both scenarios, and in my case, I would likely be a good candidate to die if I was jolted by one of those things. Firefly mentioned that if you have a medical condition you should know better and not be belligerant, but in the case of heart problems, most of us don't know about it until something happens ie: heart attack, dying from taser shock.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Locke

I think some people are missing the point.

Tasers aren't supposed to kill people, hence the term "Non-Lethal." When they occasionally kill people, they're not really a non-lethal deterrent anymore are they? Semi-lethal?

Unfortunately swinging a stair around in a drug induced frenzy doesn't constitute the death penalty. Last time I checked, nothing constitutes the death penalty.

Heres the thing, everyone acts like an idiot every now and then. Its a fact of life. Maybe not to same degree, but it happens nonetheless.

Just because this guy was having a rough day and he toked a bad batch of meth or whatever and started swinging a step around doesnt mean that society writes him off and calls it a day.

Hell, a stair tread is exponentially less lethal than tasers apparently. How many people have died in the last couple years from stairs being used as bludgeoning devices? Probably not many.

You're condemning one person over a very, very small sample size of their lives.

And I think people should be looking at alternatives. What if instead of tasering this dude they'd just sat there and waited until he got tired or hungry and then took the stair away from him?

Wow Locke, I completly disagree with you on this entire post. The use of the stair tread is irrelevant, the fact that at that moment of time, he consitituted a threat to public safety and a threat to the police means that he was a prime candidate for tazering. This isn't about looking at an entire man's life and his actions, thats for the courts to decide, not for the police to decide. And using a tazer does not consitute a death sentence, using a gun does.

And lets say that the police wait for this idiot to tire himself out and he cracks a kid or causes a fatal car accident or whatever, or he changed his tactics and ran into the middle of the road and killed himself, or threw the tread at a cop, which then becomes a perceived real and deadly threat to a police officer.

I think your terminology is wrong on the death sentence, the cops are handing out a death sentence, they're trying to stop a person from harming himself or others. Its up to the courts to decide his sentence.

And as I pointed out above, there is no such thing as a non lethal weapon, they in my mind are less then lethal. I'm betting that even a star trek phaser set on stun probably killed more then a few innocent alien species because Kirk didn't know what effect it would have on their biology.

[COGENT]

I would like to see a study that shows the comparison of police officer deaths/injury pre taser and post taser as apposed to criminal deaths. The taser was not invented to kill criminals, it was made to protect police officers and the public.

Why, when a police officer is trying to protect all our well being should they not be protected appropriately? Look at the alternatives... gun, knight stick, pepper spray... all of which have the potential of having much longer lasting effects than the taser.

Consider if this guy was swing the step at yourself or a family member and you were injured or killed because the police couldn't detain him by hand. I'm sure if that was the case this would be a very different conversation.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by flameswin

But that's exactly my point. Cops are using them in both scenarios, and in my case, I would likely be a good candidate to die if I was jolted by one of those things. Firefly mentioned that if you have a medical condition you should know better and not be belligerant, but in the case of heart problems, most of us don't know about it until something happens ie: heart attack, dying from taser shock.

I'm not saying its perfect but show me a better alternative. Would you rather be shot? bludgeoned with night sticks? everyone bitches when a taser kills someone without offering an alternative. If you show me some NON-lethal weapon that can stop a madman in his tracks as effective as a taser or a gun then i'll get behind that. Until then its the best we've got.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by flameswin

But that's exactly my point. Cops are using them in both scenarios, and in my case, I would likely be a good candidate to die if I was jolted by one of those things. Firefly mentioned that if you have a medical condition you should know better and not be belligerant, but in the case of heart problems, most of us don't know about it until something happens ie: heart attack, dying from taser shock.

And the cops don't know if you have a heart condition, and realistically it shouldn't be on their list of considerations when they make any decisions.

Cop - "Look sarge, he's coming at us with a knife"
Sarge - "Careful slappy he might have a heart condition so lets hit him with this feather"
Cop - "Gah my spleen"

[jayswin]

captaincruch, I understand your point, and I somewhat agree. I guess what I was getting at, is the taser should only be used in the same cases where a gun would have been used before tasers were around. For example, the "don't tase me bro" guy. yeah he was being disruptive, but what if died like many other people have? For the people that legitimatly cause police to use them (ie:the only other option would be to shoot them), then I agree that in those cases the person brought it on themselves.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Swarly

I'm not saying its perfect but show me a better alternative. Would you rather be shot? bludgeoned with night sticks? everyone bitches when a taser kills someone without offering an alternative. If you show me some NON-lethal weapon that can stop a madman in his tracks as effective as a taser or a gun then i'll get behind that. Until then its the best we've got.

I don't know how to make this any more clear. That's simply not my point. I agree completely that if someone is endarenging a police officer or the public, and the only options the cop had left was to either tase or shoot, then choosing to tase is the right choice, and if the person dies, well it was his own fault. My point is the people who didn't need to be tased, where the cop just thinks it's a good "control" method. The best example is the "don't tase me brp" guy, was he a threat to kill anyone? No, so what if he dies like many others have? That's my point.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I think you're missing the main point....tasing is supposed to be non-lethal. Clearly its not. So to use it as a non-lethal form of dealing with someone is clearly a flawed strategy. It has nothing to do with how many cops died or what this guy was doing before it happened. Everyone knows a cops job is tough.

No, I'm not missing the point. The fact that he was on drugs and probably smashed on liquor is what ultimately led to the Taser killing him.

I agree with CC that nothing is truly non lethal. I mean if they had tackled the guy and he landed funny he could of died. Fact of the matter is the dude was high on drugs, acting like an out of control lunatic and endangering the public. Had he not been stoned and actually listened to the cops this would NOT have happened.

At the end of the day the cops are there to protect the public from idiots. This was an idiot who did not listen to the people who are supposed to uphold our "rules". You dont want to get tasered, dont act like an idiot.

And the excuse of us all acting stupid is mute. Did you ever swing a bat at a cop?? Did you ever try to hit someone with a bat or stair?? If you did you're an idiot.

Think of it as improving the gene pool

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by flameswin

captaincruch, I understand your point, and I somewhat agree. I guess what I was getting at, is the taser should only be used in the same cases where a gun would have been used before tasers were around. For example, the "don't tase me bro" guy. yeah he was being disruptive, but what if died like many other people have? For the people that legitimatly cause police to use them (ie:the only other option would be to shoot them), then I agree that in those cases the person brought it on themselves.

so lets say instead that the cops in the "dont tase me bro" incedent hit him with a club to subdue him? would that be okay? That could cause massive brain damage or lead to death. Any action they take could lead to death. Everyone has heard those stories on the news of someone getting punched in a fight and stopping their heart. Nothing is truely Non-lethal. Until someone brings in some actual stats to say how many people die/total taserings, this is pointless.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

And the cops don't know if you have a heart condition, and realistically it shouldn't be on their list of considerations when they make any decisions.

Cop - "Look sarge, he's coming at us with a knife"
Sarge - "Careful slappy he might have a heart condition so lets hit him with this feather"
Cop - "Gah my spleen"

I was reffering to the point made earlier in the thread about people being drunk and belligerant and being tased. I wasn't suggesting that when I was younger and drunk, I lunged at a poilce officer with a knife.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I don't know how to make this any more clear. That's simply not my point. I agree completely that if someone is endarenging a police officer or the public, and the only options the cop had left was to either tase or shoot, then choosing to tase is the right choice, and if the person dies, well it was his own fault. My point is the people who didn't need to be tased, where the cop just thinks it's a good "control" method. The best example is the "don't tase me brp" guy, was he a threat to kill anyone? No, so what if he dies like many others have? That's my point.

The ability for cops to determine what force is necessary is an age old question. Look at the number of people shot by accident, beaten by cops, tasered unnecessarily.

This is a much larger issue and I truly dont think that we can say what force is necessary unless you are a cop. Having people threaten you day in day out would likely put us all on edge and move towards more aggressive force than actually necessary. Right now the cops are allowed to use Tasers becuase it is less lethal than guns. Until that changes I have no sympathy for people who TRULY act like idiots that get Tasered.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Swarly

so lets say instead that the cops in the "dont tase me bro" incedent hit him with a club to subdue him? would that be okay? That could cause massive brain damage or lead to death. Any action they take could lead to death. Everyone has heard those stories on the news of someone getting punched in a fight and stopping their heart. Nothing is truely Non-lethal. Until someone brings in some actual stats to say how many people die/total taserings, this is pointless.

Well hold on, how come now a days, the only solution to subdue people is to either shoot/tase or .......nothing? What happened to a group of cops physically subduing someone who is being belligerant? They're trained to do that. I know, I know, what if they spun him around and he landed weirdly on his neck and died. maybe cops should just stand 10 feet away from anyhone who's acting belligerant and shoot them? That would protect the police and public.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by flameswin

captaincruch, I understand your point, and I somewhat agree. I guess what I was getting at, is the taser should only be used in the same cases where a gun would have been used before tasers were around. For example, the "don't tase me bro" guy. yeah he was being disruptive, but what if died like many other people have? For the people that legitimatly cause police to use them (ie:the only other option would be to shoot them), then I agree that in those cases the person brought it on themselves.

Except that tazers are not substitutes for guns. Tazers are really substitutes for the baton. Police always need a guarateed lethal options in any kind of situation.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Well hold on, how come now a days, the only solution to subdue people is to either shoot/tase or .......nothing? What happened to a group of cops physically subduing someone who is being belligerant? They're trained to do that. I know, I know, what if they spun him around and he landed weirdly on his neck and died. maybe cops should just stand 10 feet away from anyhone who's acting belligerant and shoot them? That would protect the police and public.

well in that incident they did try to take him down but he kept fighting them to the point where they just said it tase him. At that point its either tase him or hit him over the head with a baton. All I'm saying is that %death/beating are needed to say which is better, but I think the police have those stats and that is why they continue to use the taser.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Well hold on, how come now a days, the only solution to subdue people is to either shoot/tase or .......nothing? What happened to a group of cops physically subduing someone who is being belligerant? They're trained to do that. I know, I know, what if they spun him around and he landed weirdly on his neck and died. maybe cops should just stand 10 feet away from anyhone who's acting belligerant and shoot them? That would protect the police and public.

Because its not efficient, it doesn't stop the suspect cold, it puts the cops lives in danger, and puts the suspects life in danger. The suspect invariably cries that the police beat him down and sues the system.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I have been a belligerant ass in my life (when I was younger and drunk)(and I'm assuming many on this board have been at some point in their life) ,and I have had heart problems in the past (including a heart attack), and I would hate to die from a taser shock because the police officer felt I was being belligerant and felt it was easier to just tase me. I don't quite agree with your opinion that because someone's being belligerant it's okay for them to die, and they should have known better. Death is a pretty harsh sentance for getting drunk and being belligerant imho.

Most people are harmless when drunk and belligerent, and are still with it enough to recognize that when it's the police telling you to calm down, you need to calm down. If you're that out of it and there's no options left, what would you propose they do?

Seriously, it's one thing to say "this is bad and needs to change" it's another to say "this is bad and here's how we CAN change it". If you have a better idea than a taser, let's hear it. If not, whining and complaining does nothing but take away some of the effectiveness of the police who are here to protect and serve the general public... not the asshats swinging metal stairs around at others.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

And the cops don't know if you have a heart condition, and realistically it shouldn't be on their list of considerations when they make any decisions.

Cop - "Look sarge, he's coming at us with a knife"
Sarge - "Careful slappy he might have a heart condition so lets hit him with this feather"
Cop - "Gah my spleen"

If a guy is coming after a cop with a knife they should shoot him and that's what, I assume, they do.

If a person is being "disruptive", well, that doesn't seem like such a big deal to me and maybe they don't need to be electrocuted in order to stop disrupting things.

If the guy in this story was swinging a metal object at passing cars or was a threat to the cops or other people then he probably got what was coming to him. He didn't deserve to die but unfortunately he did. If he's going to potentially hurt somebody then by all means bring out the zapper.

If a person is disrupting a political speech or acting agitated then there should be a better way of dealing with them than tasing. Less than ten years ago they didn't even have tasers. What did they do then? They didn't shoot everyone, we know that.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

If a person is disrupting a political speech or acting agitated then there should be a better way of dealing with them than tasing. Less than ten years ago they didn't even have tasers. What did they do then? They didn't shoot everyone, we know that.

they beat them with sticks

[MelBridgeman]

There is no doubt in my mind that the cops could of used verbage to control this guy, that way no one gets harmed.

[MelBridgeman]

Anyways I think some of the anti-taser gang should focus there efforts on this
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ice-taser.html

Transit Cops tazing people who don't have a valid ticket.