Man dies after being tasered in Vancouver Airport

Originally Posted by icarus

Using unlawful force resulting in death is also a criminal offence. So maybe the label 'criminal' should be used in reference to the police officer? Or better yet, let's just not call anyone a criminal just yet because we don't have all the evidence and no one has been convicted of anything.

The point is that we should regard everybody and every story with a critical eye, whilst not jumping to conclusions. Let's not think the authorities are infallible, and let's not decide who was right and who was wrong on the basis of what we imagined happened.

It may be the case that the cop did everything by the book and the guy had an unfortunate response to the taser. Maybe tasers should be avoided where pepper spray might do the trick, who knows.

Umm.... isn't that the point of a message board? I mean we comment on news links, etc based soley on what we read. I think most of us know the media does not always portray things correctly and the back and forth banter on here is simply opinion/experience based conjecture.

As far as the taser vs. OC spray thing.... i guess it is almost Monday morning isn't it?

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Both sides of this discussion are doing the same thing -- drawing conclusions based on the information we have.

and the information tells us certain facts... the guy was out of control, and there are witnesses that confirm that.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

I think most of us know the media does not always portray things correctly and the back and forth banter on here is simply opinion/experience based conjecture.

I know the rule down here is the media normally gets about 10% of any story from local law enforcement, and about 1% from the feds. It's amazing the information that is never released, and the disinformation that is disseminated. I can't imagine it being much different up there.

[Flames_Gimp]

i dunno, its just thinning out the herd. these people are Fing stupid. seriously, who doesn't know there are consequences when you resist, and show violence towards police officers..

[Flames_Gimp]

oh well, I know that 90% of you are hypocrites and would totally act different if they were involved in something like this.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

Who is the criminal?

Mischief
430. (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

(a) destroys or damages property;

(b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

(c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or

(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.


Committing a crime makes you a criminal.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Umm.... isn't that the point of a message board? I mean we comment on news links, etc based soley on what we read. I think most of us know the media does not always portray things correctly and the back and forth banter on here is simply opinion/experience based conjecture.

What exactly is the point of a message board then? To live in your own little black-and-white world where you refuse to consider other, perhaps more critical, viewpoints? You don't need a message board for that, you can do that on your own.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Mischief
430. (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

(a) destroys or damages property;

(b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

(c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or

(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.


Committing a crime makes you a criminal.

Excessive force

26. Every one who is authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess thereof according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

Committing a crime makes you a criminal.

So when you refer to "the" criminal, of which person do you speak?

Originally Posted by icarus

What exactly is the point of a message board then? To live in your own little black-and-white world where you refuse to consider other, perhaps more critical, viewpoints? You don't need a message board for that, you can do that on your own.

Hello pot, this is kettle.

There's irony in the fact that, although I don't know what happened there, I DO have some insight into the use of force by police. But, as one poster said when I urged him to do some research on the topic, 'I'll get right on that'. Its kinda the general feeling I get from the majority.

Originally Posted by icarus

Excessive force

26. Every one who is authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess thereof according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

Committing a crime makes you a criminal.

So when you refer to "the" criminal, of which person do you speak?

Icarus seriously.... you have no clue what you are saying.... you really don't. When I asked others to read up on the section, I guess I assumed they would be able to actually understand it as it pertains to law enforcement.

There was no indication of excessive force.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

Excessive force

26. Every one who is authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess thereof according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

Committing a crime makes you a criminal.

So when you refer to "the" criminal, of which person do you speak?

If we take all the information from the articles at face value and the subject did not comply with commands to stop doing what he was doing, using the taser would be considered appropriate use of force. The subject was displaying assualtive behavior and not complying with commands. The resulting death of the subject would not be considered within the use of force continuum.

What happens if the guy had started shooting at the police, the police shoot back....they kill him but in the exchange of gun fire a bullet ricochets off a wall and kills a bystandered? Excessive use of force? NO, the out come was not reasonably expected to have occured.

[Flames_Gimp]

oh man these threads on tasers are just stupid. always the cop haters trying to paint them in a bad light. The police always "made a mistake" when they taser'd someone.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Not kidding at all. Civilians have been killed, and officers careers ended because the communication channel was blocked by a language barrier. When someone is ordered to do something, and they don't do it, the officer becomes just as prone to a mistake as the suspect. The individual can make a move for his identification, or something else, and the officer can make an error because the suspect was not following orders and the officer viewed himself at risk. There have been several instances of that very thing happening in Phoenix over the past four years. Communcation failures are a bg problem.

Well, I agree that there have been situations like that all over the world. This situation is different, IMO. It took place in an airport, which is an important fact. But the more I think about this, the more evident it becomes that this guy must have spoken english. How else would he have communicated that his luggage was lost?
So if he had enough of a grasp on english to complain about his lost luggage, he must have understood what the cops were trying to tell him.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Well, I agree that there have been situations like that all over the world. This situation is different, IMO. It took place in an airport, which is an important fact. But the more I think about this, the more evident it becomes that this guy must have spoken english. How else would he have communicated that his luggage was lost?
So if he had enough of a grasp on english to complain about his lost luggage, he must have understood what the cops were trying to tell him.

plus, the tasers look like guns.... pointing a gun at someone is a universal language lol

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

oh man these threads on tasers are just stupid. always the cop haters trying to paint them in a bad light. The police always "made a mistake" when they taser'd someone.

Who exactly is a "cop hater"? The guy is dead and the worst thing he did, far as I can tell, is throw a monitor on the floor. It's obviously your prerogative to believe that the whole turned out well and ship the guy back to wherever he's from in a body bag, but some of us are daring enough to wonder if this was handled properly.

They haven't always made a mistake when they give someone the juice, but it happens. When there is a dead guy on the floor of the airport I don't think it's unreasonable to question their methods.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Who exactly is a "cop hater"? The guy is dead and the worst thing he did, far as I can tell, is throw a monitor on the floor. It's obviously your prerogative to believe that the whole turned out well and ship the guy back to wherever he's from in a body bag, but some of us are daring enough to wonder if this was handled properly.

They haven't always made a mistake when they give someone the juice, but it happens. When there is a dead guy on the floor of the airport I don't think it's unreasonable to question their methods.

Your first paragraph almost makes it sound as if he were killed for throwing a monitor on the ground. The bottom line is that if this loon wasn't acting out as he was, none of this would have happened. Even lost luggage doesn't give a person the right to completely disrupt people around him.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Who exactly is a "cop hater"? The guy is dead and the worst thing he did, far as I can tell, is throw a monitor on the floor. It's obviously your prerogative to believe that the whole turned out well and ship the guy back to wherever he's from in a body bag, but some of us are daring enough to wonder if this was handled properly.

They haven't always made a mistake when they give someone the juice, but it happens. When there is a dead guy on the floor of the airport I don't think it's unreasonable to question their methods.

Yes, he died and that is very very unfortunate....I wouldn't wish it on anyone, not one person. The fact is it was an unintended consequence that the police could not predict would occure. They didn't want to kill the guy, they didn't mean to kill him....all they wanted to do was get him under control. They used a devise that has worked many times before. It was approved for use by the police force. What more do you want?

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Wrong about what, exactly? That is a rehash of the firstv story and is completely inconclusive of anything. Is there anything in that story that states the guy was certainly on drugs, or that the police were correct in the execution of their duties? In fact, their internal investigation team appears to be conducting an investigation by that report. They are not cleared of anything at this time, and the potential for criminal charges againstb the officers still exists.

what does drugs have to do with this? the man was clearly out of control whether on drugs or not, are you saying that using their psychic powers the police should have deduced whether he was on drugs or not and refrained from tasering him if he was?

The fact is that this mans actions are what caused him to be tasered, nothing else, if it turns out he was on drugs it might gain us insight into why he was acting like a looney or why the taser had the adverse affect on him, but it has no bearing on the actions of the police at all.

[Phaneuf3]

@ the "zomg, tasers were used" crowd: ok, if this guy was running around smashing stuff a taser might have been appropriate. i don't really know, i wasn't there. but if its anywhere near accurate, the police's actions don't sound all THAT unreasonable.

@ the "zomg, they're cops - they can do no wrong" crowd: a guy is dead. this alone warrants a look at how and why the tasers were used. a few cops do some bad stuff sometimes - and they often get away with it. if you disagree with this, you are out to lunch. i don't think that in this case they acted completely out of line but still.... question authority. even if this is by the book and completely follows the force model, maybe the force model needs to be changed (not saying it does but it should be discussed).




so - now that i've pretty much disagreed, to some extent, with pretty much EVERYONE's point of view... let the petty name calling and nitpicking of semantics begin!

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

They didn't want to kill the guy, they didn't mean to kill him....all they wanted to do was get him under control. They used a devise that has worked many times before. It was approved for use by the police force. What more do you want?

I'm sure the police had no intentions of killing him, and I don't think it's fair to blame the officers involved when I'm sure they were just following the procedures they've been taught to follow.

Blame may not lie with the individual officers, but it does lie with the police department and their policies. The policies regarding tasers led to this guy getting killed.