Thread: Taser Controversy

Ok, I’ve read enough, time to talk.

First, there is a verbiage correction I would like to make. We need to change “less than lethal” to “less lethal”

Second, I am horrified that some one is testing arching electrical currents across the heart of pigeons!!!!! This must stop people!!!!! Call you congressman!

Bottom line, a taser is better than getting shot! I have been tasered, stun gunned, and mased with an array of different products and they all suck! But I would take them instead of a bullet any day, all on the same day actually. As for miss use it goes like anything else. Cops are people and people aren’t perfect. If you have ever been in a situation that calls for lethal force you would not be saying a lot of what has been spewed here! It is obvious some of the posts here are from the outside looking in. I have carried and used everything from a 12 gauge shotgun, to an ASP to hand guns to pepper spray, and when it come down to it you never know how you’ll react or whether your training will kick in and take over, or if you’ll freeze and some one will die because of it, until it happens to you. Any less lethal device is just that, less lethal! Taser, bean bags, rubber pellets, concussion grenades, any of it has the potential to be fatal, but at the end of the day any solution that will do more good than harm is worth the risk!

The real issue is proper use, and I do not for an instant believe that any LEO has the illusion of a taser being completely harmless as was stated before! Tasers have their place and have saved countless lives since being implemented. Drunk, mentally deficient, high, just saving people from themselves, tasers are a wonderful and necessary tool, not only for the criminals, but for the officers and others who implement them every day. No one wakes up in the morning hoping to get to use their firearm in the line of duty. Double duty goes to the officers and their families to know that not every situation is life or death. You have an option to save a life and the taser is said option! After all, just like a gun, a taser has never made up it’s mind to target some one. It is a tool, and as any tool goes, it is only as useful and skillful as the hands it is in!

Done!

Oh crap!!! Its the appropriate vernacular police!

Its not less than lethal; its "less lethal"
Its not an accident; its a "collision"
Its not policeman; its "police officer"
Its not an ass-whoopin'; its the "reasonable application of the minimum force necessary to gain compliance with lawful demands."
Its not garbage; its trash (that's a McDonald's joke for the other poor losers who had to work there in high school: note if you are currently employed by McDonald's I apologize for my insensitive remark about losers and will strive to be more sensitive to others and respect the differences that make us all special people... or something)

Speed_Pigeon... well put and I apologize for my less-than-logical wording. I do so hate to disappoint the semantic enforcers. Less lethal, less than lethal... how about "that thing that's gonna hurt 'em without probably killing their dumb ass" I can remember that one.

Dave... every time I see your handle I picture you running code to "Aces High" then I laugh my ass off.

bbqncigars... yeah, thats not cool. I know quite a few officers who are exactly the same. One of the ways that I encourage marksmanship on my own shift is my giving one of my vacation days to the most improved officer at each bi-annual qaulification and three days to any officer or coproral in the departments who can beat me on range day. I have never lost three days, but then I am hard to beat.

Originally Posted by w12code3

One of the ways that I encourage marksmanship on my own shift is my giving one of my vacation days to the most improved officer at each bi-annual qaulification and three days to any officer or coproral in the departments who can beat me on range day. I have never lost three days, but then I am hard to beat.

I've gotta say that Justin is one all around cool dude.
I'm sorry officer w12code3, I mean no disrespect, Sir! No, don't taser me, bro!

The less lethal, less than lethal correction was not for you w12. Anyone who knows anything about the subject or has been involved first hand understands that either term’s meaning is the same. The correction was for the moronic, uneducated, “I just want to spew some shit and be part of the conversation” readers and posters who attempt to twist the term ‘less than lethal’ into a benign, harmless one. The uniformed take this to mean that anything listed under this umbrella is believed to be in no way fatal. Hence the problem; and the entire reason for this thread and the debate in general. Once the jerk-offs among us begin to think ‘less lethal’ suddenly the argument takes on a more accurate and intelligent tone. Believe me, I’m not writing the report or testimony by any means and am the last person to correct grammar or spelling. The mistake I wanted to correct was the mistake in thought process, not in actual terminology being used.

And I can’t tell you how many times I have told a LEO that I used the least amount of force required to defuse the situation, as some guy is mumbling through a broken jaw and choking on his own blood.

Like I said, I’m not try to write anyone’s testimony, just get the slow ones among us on the right page.

One of the ways that I encourage marksmanship on my own shift is my giving one of my vacation days to the most improved officer at each bi-annual qaulification and three days to any officer or coproral in the departments who can beat me on range day. I have never lost three days, but then I am hard to beat.

How else could you be a professional cat herder... Those things are fast and hard to hit.

Just an update. The official inquiry starts today.

X

Looks like we're finally getting somewhere on this issue. I agree with the findings of the Commission for Public Complaints and independent review. Here's the CBC's main page on Tasers and all the related issues.

X

Originally Posted by xman

I agree with the findings of the Commission for Public Complaints and independent review.

I wonder is it even possible for you to agree or disagree with their findings. I don't think any of us were on the review commission and not only don't have access to the data, but are probably unqualified to analyze it as well.
I do agree that it was a good idea to have a review and I hope based on the results the policies would be improved.

Based on the video, the findings seem fair, if not even a bit lenient. If the policy is for tasers to be used against resisting subjects, then the man in the airport does not seem to fit that category, as I cannot see how walking away from the police is "resisting".. The term is "non-compliant" and a police officer addresses that differntly. Having dealt with many non-compliant individuals and many more resisting individuals while a patrol officer in Baltimore, the escalation of a situation is equally in the hands of the officer and the subject. These RCMP officers escalated to the use of force immediately.

On a side note, the airport staff called and said the man was banbing on windows and throw in furniture and computers. That must of occurred off camera or else the airport staff/rent-a-cops were exaggerating to get a faster response, in which case they set up both the RCMP officers and the victim for confrontation by presenting flase information. As a result, a man died. Where is the review of the airport staff's actions?

Originally Posted by gugi

I wonder is it even possible for you to agree or disagree with their findings. I don't think any of us were on the review commission and not only don't have access to the data, but are probably unqualified to analyze it as well.
I do agree that it was a good idea to have a review and I hope based on the results the policies would be improved.

Quite right. More accurately, I agree with the implications and recommendations and a .pdf file is available on the first page I provided a link for.

X