Man dies after being tasered in Vancouver Airport

[Winsor_Pilates]

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.

Cop haters?

maybe some people just care that someone lost their life and would like to consider whether or not that could be prevented.
Not everyone disregards human life like you do, and that doesn't make them cop haters.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by 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).

### - Excellent Post

[Azure]

I think the idea is that a taser is supposed to be a non-lethal weapon that gives cops the advantage of subduing someone without having to use excessive force.

It is not their fault someone died.

Rather...more research could be done to make sure tasers are in fact non-lethal.

But I don't see the point in blaming the cops.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

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.

If you want to call me a hypocrite, you should elaborate. How have I not considered the issue critically?

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

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.

LOL. I have no clue what I am saying, yet you claim there was no indication of excessive force when this guy ended up dead for resisting arrest? To quote one of your phrases "Hello pot, this is kettle." It is a bit unusual for people to die from being tasered; this is enough for a prima facie argument for excessive force.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

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.

Why would the resulting death not be considered within the use of force continuum? Because of remoteness? Also, we have no indication of how the taser was applied, whether it was used appropriately or inappropriately. If the taser was used inappropriately, does this make any difference to the way you view the matter?

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

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.

This is irrelevant because this pertains to injury sustained by a third party. Force was not directed against the bystander.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

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.

The actions of the person led to this guy getting killed. And yes, the taser may have been the straw that broke his body. And, an investigation will be conducted, there is one everytime someone dies in police custody.

If people are unhappy with tasers, then the whole issue needs to be re-evaluated. You are basically saying that tasers should be considered as leathal force...are you not? I personally would disagree. Like someone else pointed out they save a lot more lives than they take and in most cases getting zapped does not harm a person. BUt....should we consider it leathal force because it can kill people?

I don't know.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

Why would the resulting death not be considered within the use of force continuum? Because of remoteness? Also, we have no indication of how the taser was applied, whether it was used appropriately or inappropriately. If the taser was used inappropriately, does this make any difference to the way you view the matter?

The only way the death could be considered use of force is if the police officer did something like zap the guy for 10 mins straight....something along that line. But I would consider that grasping for straws here. There is no indication the officer did such a thing. If the death is a result of proper use of the taser than it wouldn't fall within the use of force continuum.

This is irrelevant because this pertains to injury sustained by a third party. Force was not directed against the bystander.

From what I gathered from your previous posts it isn't irrelavent to what you were arguing unless youa re saying the actual implementation of the device it self is in question and not the device.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

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?

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by Azure

I think the idea is that a taser is supposed to be a non-lethal weapon that gives cops the advantage of subduing someone without having to use excessive force.

It is not their fault someone died.

Rather...more research could be done to make sure tasers are in fact non-lethal.

But I don't see the point in blaming the cops.

Well now we are getting to the heart of the issue: whether the taser use was warranted.

Was the use of a taser justified under the circumstances? Was the taser deployed properly?

People don't usually die from tasers. When they do, it raises suspicions about the conduct of the police.

If the evidence suggests the taser was indeed used properly (situationally and in deployment), then the cop should be without fault.

If the evidence suggests that the taser was used improperly, then it may be found that excessive force was used and whether the cop intended to kill the guy or not he will nevertheless be held at fault for it. It is the thin skull rule. If you break the law, you are held responsible for all the results no matter how unforseeable.

This question of fact is something a court should decide. Hopefully the internal investigation within the police department is conducted independently and disinterestedly, and if there is enough evidence for a case against the cop it should go to trial. If the cop truly did everything by the book, he should be okay.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

@ 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).

No one is saying an investigation should take place or questions shouldnt be asked. No one said that at all. An investigation is always conducted one someone dies in police custody and should be done. And no has said anything about cops never do anything bad.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The only way the death could be considered use of force is if the police officer did something like zap the guy for 10 mins straight....something along that line. But I would consider that grasping for straws here. There is no indication the officer did such a thing. If the death is a result of proper use of the taser than it wouldn't fall within the use of force continuum.

I agree if the taser was used properly then there was no excessive use of force (unless the taser is considered inherently flawed to the extent that people die more often than they should). There are a lot of ways the taser use could be considered excessive besides zapping a guy for ten minutes. For example, if police procedure requires an officer to warn a suspect that he is about to taser him and he doesn't, that could be construed in court as excessive use of force. Any variation from proper procedure could result in a finding of excessive force. And unfortunately for the cop, if you don't do things by the book you are responsible for all the consequences.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

From what I gathered from your previous posts it isn't irrelavent to what you were arguing unless youa re saying the actual implementation of the device it self is in question and not the device.

Well it is irrelevant because we are talking about use of force applied against a suspect, but in obiter I suppose if the cop's shooting was excessive force then he'd be responsible for the bystander, but in your scenario he is being fired upon so returning fire would not be considered excessive.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

Well now we are getting to the heart of the issue: whether the taser use was warranted.

Was the use of a taser justified under the circumstances? Was the taser deployed properly?

We are? From all acounts the taser was warranted. I along with wookie have said this. If we take all the information at face value it was warranted. The only leg you have to stand on was "was the taser applied properly" and there are no indications that it wasn't. Maybe it wasn't but you have made a pretty big arguement with only having a suggestion that it may have been aplied improperly.

People don't usually die from tasers. When they do, it raises suspicions about the conduct of the police.

It also raises suspicion that maybe he was cracked up on something. According to the articles there were quite a few witnesses. If the police had done something inappropriate, don't you think we would have heard about that already with people coming forward? Again, there is nothing to suggest they did not follow procedure.

If the evidence suggests the taser was indeed used properly (situationally and in deployment), then the cop should be without fault.

Yes, everything so far points to this conclusion.

If the evidence suggests that the taser was used improperly, then it may be found that excessive force was used and whether the cop intended to kill the guy or not he will nevertheless be held at fault for it. It is the thin skull rule. If you break the law, you are held responsible for all the results no matter how unforseeable.

Yes, nobody has said otherwise. Again, it appears that you are pulling this arguement out of thin air. If you had articulated yourself at the beginning that this was your stance, we wouldn't have gotten this far.

This question of fact is something a court should decide. Hopefully the internal investigation within the police department is conducted independently and disinterestedly, and if there is enough evidence for a case against the cop it should go to trial. If the cop truly did everything by the book, he should be okay.

Why wouldn't it be done with integrity? It appears you have very little trust when it comes to police.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

I agree if the taser was used properly then there was no excessive use of force (unless the taser is considered inherently flawed to the extent that people die more often than they should). There are a lot of ways the taser use could be considered excessive besides zapping a guy for ten minutes. For example, if police procedure requires an officer to warn a suspect that he is about to taser him and he doesn't, that could be construed in court as excessive use of force. Any variation from proper procedure could result in a finding of excessive force. And unfortunately for the cop, if you don't do things by the book you are responsible for all the consequences.

Basically you are saying the police are guilty untill they prove themselves otherwise.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

No one is saying an investigation should take place or questions shouldnt be asked. No one said that at all. An investigation is always conducted one someone dies in police custody and should be done. And no has said anything about cops never do anything bad.

there's certain posters here that are being very dismissive of certain possible concerns or scenarios going as far as labeling people that aren't backing the cops as 'cop-haters'. they've gone about as far as they can to say that and the cops' actions shouldn't be questioned without coming right out and saying it.

stories like these not only call into question the cops' actions and the police's policies on use of force but also the quality of investigations into possible police misconduct.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Here is a similar incident in Ontario.

http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GONE...=&lang=_e.html

[jolinar of malkshor]

stories like these not only call into question the cops' actions and the police's policies on use of force but also the quality of investigations into possible police misconduct.

Stories like what? They stopped the man from hurting other people and destroying property. There are no reports that the police abused their powers. Nothing of the sort has come out to suggest such things. No accusations of prolonged taser exposure (?) or anything. I don't get you guys.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The actions of the person led to this guy getting killed.

I disagree with you completely on this point. Yelling, knocking stuff over and generally being a belligerent jerk did not kill him. Apparently, a taser did. This guy's actions and the police reactions are not one and the same thing. If you slept with my girlfriend and I then used a taser on you, I don't think the police would put the blame on you for the tasering.

You are basically saying that tasers should be considered as leathal force...are you not?

I'm not taking a stance on whether or not they should be considered lethal force, but I think the fact that a person died as a result of their use is very reasonable cause for an evaluation of police policy regarding their use.

Like someone else pointed out they save a lot more lives than they take and in most cases getting zapped does not harm a person.

Even if a tasered person is not harmed in most cases, the fact that some are harmed and even killed says to me that the use of a taser should be taken extremely seriously. How seriously must this guy's family be taking the use of a taser? He is needlessly dead.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Stories like what? They stopped the man from hurting other people and destroying property. There are no reports that the police abused their powers. Nothing of the sort has come out to suggest such things. No accusations of prolonged taser exposure (?) or anything. I don't get you guys.

a guy gets tasered. a guy dies shortly after.


if you cannot see even a possible link between these two events enough to simply question whether using a taser is an appropriate response to say.... a student asking a question at a Q&A session or someone forgetting their ID card while at the library then I'm quite frightened that you're in law enforcement.

[Phaneuf3]

just to wrap up with a couple final thoughts before i go to bed....

since most people's arguments dismissing critics of the police seems to rest on the fact that "its how they're trained"; if police were trained to shoot jaywalkers (maybe just in the foot so it wouldn't be lethal... usually) to stop them from committing a crime and being a danger to themselves, others, and people's personal property, would that make it right?

[icarus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

We are? From all acounts the taser was warranted. I along with wookie have said this. If we take all the information at face value it was warranted. The only leg you have to stand on was "was the taser applied properly" and there are no indications that it wasn't. Maybe it wasn't but you have made a pretty big arguement with only having a suggestion that it may have been aplied improperly.

There are no indications it wasn't used properly? Well let's see, a guy died. People don't usually die from tasers. Done. On the contrary there is no indication that it was used properly.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

It also raises suspicion that maybe he was cracked up on something. According to the articles there were quite a few witnesses. If the police had done something inappropriate, don't you think we would have heard about that already with people coming forward? Again, there is nothing to suggest they did not follow procedure.

Well we heard that a guy died, witnesses have apparently reported that to the newspaper, so I guess at first blush it seems that they did something inappropriate or did not follow proper procedure.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Yes, everything so far points to this conclusion.

Everything points to this conclusion except for the fact that the guy died, which is kind of a major point.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Yes, nobody has said otherwise. Again, it appears that you are pulling this arguement out of thin air. If you had articulated yourself at the beginning that this was your stance, we wouldn't have gotten this far.

Pulling what argument out of thin air? I have articulated from the beginning that the cop may or may not be at fault, we don't know. Have you not been following along?

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Why wouldn't it be done with integrity? It appears you have very little trust when it comes to police.

I never said it wouldn't be done with integrity. It appears you have very little reading comprehension. Having said that, police investigations such as this in some jurisdictions are carried out independently rather than internally.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Basically you are saying the police are guilty untill they prove themselves otherwise.

In law the onus is on police to justify use of force.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I disagree with you completely on this point. Yelling, knocking stuff over and generally being a belligerent jerk did not kill him. Apparently, a taser did. This guy's actions and the police reactions are not one and the same thing. If you slept with my girlfriend and I then used a taser on you, I don't think the police would put the blame on you for the tasering.

Had he not acted the way he did he may still be alive. Therefor, his actions were the first step toward his death with many other steps involved

I'm not taking a stance on whether or not they should be considered lethal force, but I think the fact that a person died as a result of their use is very reasonable cause for an evaluation of police policy regarding their use.

This isn't the first time this has happened and it wont be the last. And every time it happens there is some kind of investigation.

Even if a tasered person is not harmed in most cases, the fact that some are harmed and even killed says to me that the use of a taser should be taken extremely seriously. How seriously must this guy's family be taking the use of a taser? He is needlessly dead.

You dont know that....read the link that I posted before. Again, everyone is jumping to conclusions.

Any devise used to bring control on someone has a chance of injuring or killing that person. If someone has a certain condition and they are handcuffed wrong and not positioned right they can die. It is not the handcuffs fault.

Deploying pepperspray on someone who has breathing conditions and heart conditions could kill the person.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by icarus

There are no indications it wasn't used properly? Well let's see, a guy died. People don't usually die from tasers. Done. On the contrary there is no indication that it was used properly.

http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GONE...=&lang=_e.html

Well we heard that a guy died, witnesses have apparently reported that to the newspaper, so I guess at first blush it seems that they did something inappropriate or did not follow proper procedure.

http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GONE...=&lang=_e.html

Everything points to this conclusion except for the fact that the guy died, which is kind of a major point.

http://ogov.newswire.ca/ontario/GONE...=&lang=_e.html

In law the onus is on police to justify use of force.

In law, everyone is equal before the law.