LeightonJames Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Well almost: BBC News - Police use Taser on blind man after stick mistaken for sword That is just insane.
Gatt Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Latest Lancashire Police training aide has been leaked already:
Guest Guest Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Good job the police don't carry guns, otherwise people who fail to stop/hear could end up dead... oh wait there...
tech_guy Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Great - now I know what my costume is going to be on Saturday October 20th for the march in London.....
AMLinington Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) Good job the police don't carry guns, otherwise people who fail to stop/hear could end up dead... oh wait there... Or don't speak english and don't understand? Oh... wait... What about deaf people that use the internationally recognised gesture for deafness that get thrown in jail for using 'foul hand gestures' and accused of being drunk and disorderly? Oh... wait.... Tasing an innocent person is disgusting! I've lost count of the number of stories I've seen in the news of people killed by taser... The officer should be dismissed from his post and forced to submit a public apology admitting culpability (and stupidity!). Edited October 17, 2012 by AMLinington
localzuk Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I don't get it. Last I checked, swords were about an inch wide. Not a skinny white stick...
LosOjos Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I thought the police were only allowed to use reasonable force? In which case, surely the officer in question should be arrested and charged himself. I don't see how shocking a 60+ year old man who hasn't even acknowledged you (no doubt because he had no reason to believe the police were after him!) let alone resisted arrest is reasonable force.
andyturpie Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 My dark sense of humour made me spit my tea all over my twin screens hearing this. Im off to hell in a handbasket...
Andrew_C Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Happened in the 70's when I lived in Texas. Now of course, back then, Tasers hadn't been invented. The cops relied on lead slugs.
familiarrealms Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I don't get it. Last I checked, swords were about an inch wide. Not a skinny white stick... Could have been a Rapier...
Disease Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 He was also told to stop by the police officer and if they are armed they have to announce that fact, but ignored it, he is probably not blind more partially sighted, we know how the press like to beef up a story.
localzuk Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) He was also told to stop by the police officer and if they are armed they have to announce that fact, but ignored it, he is probably not blind more partially sighted, we know how the press like to beef up a story. Kinda irrelevant. Firing is the last thing the officer should do, after all other options have been exhausted. Shooting someone from BEHIND is not acceptable, when that person is not showing any aggressive behaviour. Using a taser is supposed to be used in place of lethal force - that is what they were introduced saying. A man walking down a pavement with a white stick sloping to the pavement? Not showing any aggression, no-one in immediate danger etc... Not someone who should be tased. Edited October 17, 2012 by localzuk
aerospacemango Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Or don't speak english and don't understand? Oh... wait... What about deaf people that use the internationally recognised gesture for deafness that get thrown in jail for using 'foul hand gestures' and accused of being drunk and disorderly? Oh... wait.... Tasing an innocent person is disgusting! I've lost count of the number of stories I've seen in the news of people killed by taser... The officer should be dismissed from his post and forced to submit a public apology admitting culpability (and stupidity!). Do you have a source for these numbers? It's not often I play Devil's Advocate, but here goes.... "Since Tasers were introduced in 2004 three people – including Hulmes and Burns – have died after their deployment. Amnesty International believes Tasers are a legitimate option for highly trained police officers in very limited situations." - Taken from here - Taser-related deaths raise concerns over 'non-lethal' police options | World news | The Guardian That is from August 2011, and suggests that deaths aren't as common as you would like to think. Agreed that in the US figures seem to be in their hundreds, but we wouldn't read about them so much in Blighty! The sensationalism behind what you posted was unusual, and I had come to expect a more rounded view of things from you. I believe a public apology from the policeman is necessary, but the pilloring of him, and others, is not really acceptable when they are trying to do their job. I presume those amongst us who have never made a mistake would now like to come forward with their arguments???
localzuk Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Do you have a source for these numbers? It's not often I play Devil's Advocate, but here goes.... "Since Tasers were introduced in 2004 three people – including Hulmes and Burns – have died after their deployment. Amnesty International believes Tasers are a legitimate option for highly trained police officers in very limited situations." - Taken from here - Taser-related deaths raise concerns over 'non-lethal' police options | World news | The Guardian That is from August 2011, and suggests that deaths aren't as common as you would like to think. Agreed that in the US figures seem to be in their hundreds, but we wouldn't read about them so much in Blighty! The sensationalism behind what you posted was unusual, and I had come to expect a more rounded view of things from you. I believe a public apology from the policeman is necessary, but the pilloring of him, and others, is not really acceptable when they are trying to do their job. I presume those amongst us who have never made a mistake would now like to come forward with their arguments??? Sorry but that's bull****! Tasers ARE lethal. Amnesty International have also said hundreds of people have died from tasers. "Since 2001, more than 500 people have died following Taser stuns according to Amnesty International, which said in February that stricter guidelines for Taser use were "imperative." But in only a few dozen cases, medical examiners have ruled that the Taser contributed to the death. In some cases, other factors, such as drug use and prior medical conditions, also played roles." - Heart study finds Tasers may cause deaths Thing is, 8 deaths as a direct result. Many hundreds from indirect causes (ie. the taser causing other things to get worse or existing conditons etc...). As I said above, Taser's were introduced as a direct replacement for lethal force weapons (ie. guns). So, the requirements for their discharge should be the same as with using guns. If I make a mistake, I won't kill someone. If they do, they can. That man has already had strokes, this sort of shock can cause another.
aerospacemango Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) Sorry but that's bull****! Tasers ARE lethal. Amnesty International have also said hundreds of people have died from tasers. "Since 2001, more than 500 people have died following Taser stuns according to Amnesty International, which said in February that stricter guidelines for Taser use were "imperative." But in only a few dozen cases, medical examiners have ruled that the Taser contributed to the death. In some cases, other factors, such as drug use and prior medical conditions, also played roles." - Heart study finds Tasers may cause deaths Thing is, 8 deaths as a direct result. Many hundreds from indirect causes (ie. the taser causing other things to get worse or existing conditons etc...). As I said above, Taser's were introduced as a direct replacement for lethal force weapons (ie. guns). So, the requirements for their discharge should be the same as with using guns. If I make a mistake, I won't kill someone. If they do, they can. That man has already had strokes, this sort of shock can cause another. Good discussion skills there..... Anyway, back to the point... Tasers ARE lethal....I was questioning the quoted "...lost count of the number of stories I've seen in the news...". I would have thought that that was quite obvious from my post. I was putting forward my side that there simply are NOT that amount that get reported in the UK press. This makes it even more disturbing when they are. The hyperbole used in that sentence was what was being questioned. Please note.... At no point have I accused your post of being bull****! I also read that Amnesty Int page BEFORE posting to here! *EDIT* You may also notice that in my post I refer to the hundreds claimed in the USA. Please read my post a little closer next time.... Thank you! Edited October 17, 2012 by aerospacemango
localzuk Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) Good discussion skills there..... Anyway, back to the point... Tasers ARE lethal....I was questioning the quoted "...lost count of the number of stories I've seen in the news...". I would have thought that that was quite obvious from my post. I was putting forward my side that there simply are NOT that amount that get reported in the UK press. This makes it even more disturbing when they are. The hyperbole used in that sentence was what was being questioned. Please note.... At no point have I accused your post of being bull****! I also read that Amnesty Int page BEFORE posting to here! Your post said that the officer should basically get told off and that's it. That's what I call bull****. It annoys me a lot as you're basically saying that an officer risking the life of an innocent man is a slap on the wrist offence, hence my anger. The original poster didn't say UK. They just referred to having lost count of deaths. It was you who decided to arbitrarily limit it down to UK for some reason. Does a US taser death not matter then? The hyperbole that you refer to was not hyperbole in my view, it was actually based pretty firmly in fact - hence the link I posted. And your reply has focussed on only one aspect of my post, ignoring all the other aspects. For example the Taser being a replacement for lethal force. Edited October 17, 2012 by localzuk
AlClark Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 cant remember the source but a lot of organizations want them to be referred to as "less lethal" not "non lethal" due to the fact that 500 people have been killed in the US with taser in the last 10 years!
aerospacemango Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Your post said that the officer should basically get told off and that's it. That's what I call bull****. It annoys me a lot as you're basically saying that an officer risking the life of an innocent man is a slap on the wrist offence, hence my anger. The original poster didn't say UK. They just referred to having lost count of deaths. It was you who decided to arbitrarily limit it down to UK for some reason. Does a US taser death not matter then? The hyperbole that you refer to was not hyperbole in my view, it was actually based pretty firmly in fact - hence the link I posted. It seems quite obvious to me that you completely fail to recognise what I was saying. One would assume that a poster that lives in Hampshire would be mainly dealing in the UK press. However, if @AMLightfoot wishes to dispel that assumption, and explain that she regularly reads international (local) press, then I am glad to back down on my assumption. I chose to focus on one point of your reply, as that is what I had done originally. I concentrated on the hyperbole of the original statement. You also seem to have missed that point where I agreed that taser are lethal, but please don't let that get in the way of your frothing mouth!
Simcfc73 Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I've never been tasered but then again I respect the law, am a polite law abiding citizen who satys out of trouble. Anyone mentioned this being a police state yet? That usually gets wheeled out when something like this gets brought up. BBC News - Dale Cregan held after policewomen killed in Manchester
DavidIrwin Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 The original poster didn't say UK. They just referred to having lost count of deaths. It was you who decided to arbitrarily limit it down to UK for some reason. Does a US taser death not matter then? The hyperbole that you refer to was not hyperbole in my view, it was actually based pretty firmly in fact - hence the link I posted. It is a fair point to note that the Tasers which are available in the UK are very different from those available in the US. They are more carefully tested and regulated and in many cases are lower powered and therefore less likely to be lethal. Dave
aerospacemango Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I've never been tasered but then again I respect the law, am a polite law abiding citizen who satys out of trouble. Anyone mentioned this being a police state yet? That usually gets wheeled out when something like this gets brought up. BBC News - Dale Cregan held after policewomen killed in Manchester And I'm willing to bet you've never killed someone by mistake either????
AMLinington Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) The assumption of hyperbole assumes I'm not counting the US news stories I see in various sensationalist news feeds, blogs I follow and links attached to other stories etc etc. Having 'lost count' indicates that I can't accurately put a number on the quantity of stories I've read. Easily more than 10 - certainly enough for me to not pay attention to how many I've read. Which is more than the UK deaths, true, but significantly less than the worldwide number of deaths. Perhaps I should have broadened my statement to say 'I've lost count of the number of stories where the poor judgement of police officers has caused death' - this number is presumably (given worldwide media) in the thousands if not more when you take into account the varying methods of death - shooting, being hit by a police car, dying in police custody due to neglect and/or beating, riot, tasing, being hit over the head, restrained in such as way as to result in suffocation, and so on. Either way, it is still disgraceful and surely indicative of misconduct that an officer tases an elderly man for no reason other than assumed threat based on misunderstanding. Blind or not, even if he'd had a walking stick, or a silver-coloured crutch, the shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach of this officer was inappropriate and the officer should be removed from any duty where he may make mistakes of this potential gravity again. Electrocuting ANYONE is dangerous, but the elderly aren't known for their robustness... The fall alone could have resulted in a fatal head injury and a stroke sufferer would be at increased risk of haemorrage by virtue of a pre-existing weakness in the blood supply to the brain. That being said, my father is 63 and he is reasonably robust, but being hit with a taser would still cause him significant issue - even if he has no effect from the electricity itself, a fall onto concrete/tarmac/paving of any unspecified description can break bones! Edited October 17, 2012 by AMLinington
aerospacemango Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Thank you for your clarification! Now, personally, I think that the policeman would have been better served to get in front of the man and challenge him. Perhaps that is what he will choose next time. The "shoot-first, ask-questions-later" policy can never be justified whether it's a gun or a taser, can it?
localzuk Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Thank you for your clarification! Now, personally, I think that the policeman would have been better served to get in front of the man and challenge him. Perhaps that is what he will choose next time. The "shoot-first, ask-questions-later" policy can never be justified whether it's a gun or a taser, can it? Then why did you say: I believe a public apology from the policeman is necessary, but the pilloring of him, and others, is not really acceptable when they are trying to do their job. Why would that policy be unacceptable if the only outcome from it is 'oh dear, we did bad, sorry' when they get it wrong?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now