It's time to take the tasers away from cops! - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Machete_ · 10-14-2010, 07:56 AM

OP needs to be tazed repeatedly.

dyna mo · 10-14-2010, 08:01 AM

mchacal-

aren't you the guy who posted this-

Quote:

Originally Posted by mchacal

After reading this 2 threads:

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=992327

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=992321

I really need to see some US cops getting killed

Any good gore vids out there please???

get off your high horse shit head.

mchacal · 10-14-2010, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

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

blackmonsters · 10-14-2010, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machete_

OP needs to be tazed repeatedly.

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

Vendzilla · 10-14-2010, 08:14 AM

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

u-Bob · 10-14-2010, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EZRhino

Its not a deadly weapon and its was invented to force people to comply without using deadly force.
I think she learned a valuable lesson.

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.

mchacal · 10-14-2010, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

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

You're 100% right

u-Bob · 10-14-2010, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

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

qft!

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Bullshit! It was invented to subdue violent suspects and to protect the officer.

What you just said is the entire reason tasers need to be taken away.
They should not be using tasers to get compliance anymore that using the baton
or the gun for compliance. If the cop didn't have a taser and had thrown his baton
and put those stitches in the girls head you'd have a totally different opinion.

You've come to believe that the taser is a harmless tool that causes no injuries and
even when you see the kind of injury that it caused you still can't see it.

That's called being "brain washed".

qft

Roald · 10-14-2010, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

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

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

mchacal · 10-14-2010, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

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

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

_Richard_ · 10-14-2010, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by potter

You own your own choices in life, and the consequences that come with them.

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?

Roald · 10-14-2010, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mchacal

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

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

blackmonsters · 10-14-2010, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

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

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.

mchacal · 10-14-2010, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

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

I quote

Quote:

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

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

Roald · 10-14-2010, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

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 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

Read

Tom_PM · 10-14-2010, 08:48 AM

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.

blackmonsters · 10-14-2010, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

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

Read

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.

EZRhino · 10-14-2010, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mchacal

It is! http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=1A01E91E134A327080256F19004 2408D

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.

potter · 10-14-2010, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

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?

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.

10-14-2010, 08:14 AM	#55
Vendzilla Biker Gnome Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: cell#324 Posts: 23,200	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 __________________ Webair died? Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants think about that

10-14-2010, 08:48 AM	#66
Tom_PM Porn Meister Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 16,443	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. __________________ 43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.

10-14-2010, 07:56 AM	#51
Machete_ WINNING! Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 14,579	OP needs to be tazed repeatedly.