OP needs to be tazed repeatedly.

:2 cents:

mchacal-

aren't you the guy who posted this-

get off your high horse shit head.

Yes that was me, I must say it was kind of stupid as there are a lot of good law enforcement officials doing a great job out there and I must apologize

But well... at least I know when I'm wrong

You need a taser shoved up your ass to burn some of the bullshit away that you're full of.


:1orglaugh

I think all weapons that cops carry should only be used for protection only, even the non lethal ones, I don't understand why they need to use it to catch someone, thats just wrong

Let's look up the definition of the word 'torture': the deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons in an attempt to force another person to yield information or to make a confession or for any other reason;

Using a taser to force people to comply = torture.

You're 100% right

qft!

qft

you're kidding right?

Your mum is having her throat sliced as the police bumps into the situation. Murderer decides to run and the police should not use their weapon to catch him?

Yeah right :2 cents:

Ok you got an exception to the rule, but a little girl running is not an immediate danger to anyone

indeed.

once i was in a club as a kid, and happened to be looking for some friends when i 'turned away', in the darkest part of the club.

apparently there was two cops 'in front of me' and i was 'running'. What happens if they decided i wasn't 'complying' enough?

exception?

Man I can name tons of situations where the police SHOULD use their weapons to catch someone.

Now in this particular case it might seem a bit too much (don't know the real story) but saying police should not use their weapons to catch someone is just plain bs :2 cents:

Sliced throats, murder, dead mom....none of that is involved in this case.

People should stop making arguments where they make up things that have
absolutely nothing to do with the case and then try to use that as a valid point
about the case.

The teen girl is not a murderer and did not have a weapon and did not slice any throats.

If I'm going to just make stuff up like you then I would say "what if the teen girl did
not have any arms or legs and was crawling away on her stomach and would not
stop? Do you tase the crippled snake like bitch in the back of her head?".

Anybody can make stuff up. Dealing with the reality of what really happened seems
to be a problem for some people however.

I quote

The case you stated before falls into "Use for protection" if the officers lets a murderer runs away there may be new victims, in that case the use of brutal force in justified

So the rule still fully applies

I am just commenting on the uterly stupid statement that cops should not use weapons to catch someone. I agreed already on the fact that in this case it looks like overkill :2 cents:

Read :2 cents:

I'm still not over the "dont tase me bro" incident. 700 pounds of uniformed meat, and they shock him with this device with utterly no reason whatsoever. It's televised to the world, and all we get out of it is a t-shirt and some comedy? Something so obviously wrong there.. and nothing happens.

I agree with Vendzilla.. these tools should be used for protection and as a last resort. If you can sit your ass on a stick figure citizen to control him, then using a taser on him should be a crime.

Cops can not shoot(with a gun) a non-violent suspect in the back that is running away and unarmed.
So it's utterly stupid to imply that they can.

If cops could do this lots of innocent people would be killed before ever getting a trial.
Some people run because they are guilty, some run because they are scared, some
because they are stupid, some were actually out on a jog and the cops are mistaken
to think they are a suspect.

You'd be the cop on the street shooting people in the ass because they didn't
stop running in the local 5k street race. :1orglaugh

Its a fairly unbias article. I think helps my argument then hurts.
"Some police departments have reported a significant fall in police shootings following the introduction of Tasers. In February 2004, the Phoenix Police Department, Arizona, announced that officer-involved shootings had fallen by 54% from 28 in 2002 to 13 in 2003, with fatal shootings down from 13 to 9 during the same period, the lowest number since 1990."

Calling the taser a deadly weapon is like labeling peanuts poison. Sure there are some people who get hurt or even killed by peanuts but they are not poison. And there are instances were cops are using it incorectly. They should be prosecuted.

:1orglaugh

I'm sure it was a perfectly legit club, and the cops being there was merely coincidence.


... I was a "club kid" as well for a long while. The only "clubs" I was at where police showed up and went after people were definitely not the clubs I should have been at in the first place.

Again, own your own choices in life.