I realize that!Quest4Less said:
I was attempting to make a point. Apparently you, danmand and Esco missed it.
Another death from from Taser
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
I was attempting to make a point. Apparently you, danmand and Esco missed it.
Totally agree.slowpoke said:
I have confidence the problem will be corrected. Thankfully we don't live in a police state.
Esco! said:
Two schools of thought there with CQB.
One line of thought proposes a quick double tap to centre of mass. If the target still moving likely has armour then you must take the head shot.
Other school says that takes too long and if the target is wearing armour and is good you give them too much time to respond. this school says one to centre of mass then head.
Most of my courses have favoured the former as even if the guy is wearing armour it must be very good to withstand two quick rounds placed together. Also the shear impact of the rounds will stun or wind them such that you can get a head shot in. Added bonus if no armour then two rounds placed on top of each other does exponentially more tissue damage. better yield.
Even in a free state like ours, it is amazing how quickly the police will lose their perspective and cross the line when nobody is watching them. Tasers came along only a few years ago but already the RCMP are using them like remote control units - ie just push a button and you can fast-forward to the part where the suspect conveniently falls on his head with no argument whatsoever. So much simpler than the normal plot line where good cops interact reasonably with people and only drop the ones who can't be dealt with any other way.lookingforitallthetime said:
The is worse then stunning the Polish guy.shakenbake said:
If the 12 year is running in traffic stop chasing her and she will stop running in traffic. She was just skipping school wtf.
If you can't overpower a 6 year old with a piece of glass it might be time to find another line of work.
The should start using the Miami cops for test dummies on the Taser test range.
I will say this in defence of cops, they all carry guns and if they decide to physically struggle with a suspect and he/she manages to get hold of their gun, all bets are off what could happen next.
Including bystanders getting shot after the suspect is done killing the cop(s)
I'm sure this has already happened sometime in history
Including bystanders getting shot after the suspect is done killing the cop(s)
I'm sure this has already happened sometime in history
I have absolutely no problem if the police have gone through all the other options and the force is appropriate. (The police aren't managing these guns as if the were lethal.)Esco! said:
I don't ever see a need to zap a couple of unarmed kids (sorry the one kid was wielding a piece of glass).
I don't think anybody will deny the police the ability to defend themselves
if threatened. The problem is what ia said in the report:
But they also suggest a pattern of use by the Mounties as a
quick means to keep relatively low-risk prisoners, drunks and unruly suspects in line.
Stun guns were initially billed as a police alternative to lethal force, she said in an interview.
"What we're seeing is that they're using them in situations to subdue, gain compliance or perhaps even punitively when someone has reacted in ways they don't approve of."
With thanks to the guy who says he is only looking.
if threatened. The problem is what ia said in the report:
But they also suggest a pattern of use by the Mounties as a
quick means to keep relatively low-risk prisoners, drunks and unruly suspects in line.
Stun guns were initially billed as a police alternative to lethal force, she said in an interview.
"What we're seeing is that they're using them in situations to subdue, gain compliance or perhaps even punitively when someone has reacted in ways they don't approve of."
With thanks to the guy who says he is only looking.
LancsLad said:Just what kind of a threat can you be to the coppers if you don't have arms. Just how lazy are these guys??
lol, he can always kick a chair towards a glass window which to some means an act of violent behaviour justyifing and triple crown worth of tasering.
"I can't believe he's still trying to fight"
News flash Sherlock, after 1000 volts x3 he's not going to be perfectly still let alone if he's fighting for his life.
KWI said:
Kiwi,
You are a bright person, and with a few extra facts your vision of the situation will be even clearer.
1) All those guys in ref coats have been shot with a Taser at least once, it is part of the training. So they know exactly how it feels. (It is incredibly uncomfortable, but does not exactly hurt, by the way).
2) The “the training provided to them before tasers came out” used to kill people fairly often. Also when it was used officers often were injured. Now days a bite from an infected person can prove fatal, so few officers are willing to risk it.
3) Officers used to be sort of oversized. Now days with all the social pressures and PC issues they average officer is 75 lbs smaller. (I made up 75. I have seen everything from 60 to 90 in reports).
4) Bottom line…. The mental process is something like…. “I felt it, not that bad.” + “Published lower risk to perp than most physical restraint techniques” + “much safer for me” = ZAP !!!!!
Problem is to remember to let go of the trigger. New ones are fixed duration by the way.
