Stun guns and cops.

[leopold]

http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38958

Student repeatedly shot with a Taser by UCLA police. While in handcuffs. Because he couldn't stand up. Fancy that

nowhere in this link does it mention the student being shot with a taser while in handcuffs. nor does it cite any library officials as witnesses.
the actions of the police were justified as far as i can tell.

No, no. Not my 'opinion'. Fact. I'd appreciate it if you didn't attempt to dismiss facts by labelling them as opinion.

untill you back up your opinions with evidence then, well, they are opinions.

My statement is factual, and is supported by a wealth of observations. A taser is only used as an alternative to deadly force in a minority of situations. In most situations, it is used as an instrument of coercion to force compliance in non-lethal situations, where the target isn't a real threat.

links? any kind of evidence at all? or is this your opinion too?

If you doubt me, I suggest you educate yourself. Here is an excellent Amnesty International article which analyzes in what situations police tend to use tasers.
web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGAMR511392004

i have educated myself, i also have the experience.
i've been to the amnesty website. out of all the cases they present i agree with 1 possibly 2 of their findings of indiscriminate taser use.

More often than not, tasers are NOT used as an alternative to deadly force.

nobody anywhere said they had to be.

They used to force compliance in non-lethal situations.

of course you are leaving out the part about them resisting arrest, whacked out on drugs, or other crimes.
not a single case of taser use has been presented where the "victim" wasn't breaking the law.

This includes citizens who struggle in their handcuffs,

while i appreciate your opinion i wish you would present facts.
links to the above allegation?

children who 'act out' (eg. throw a book),

links to tasers being used against children throwing books? or is this another opinion of yours?

and citizens who gives the police 'attitude'.

and again links?

Red herring. My experience in law enforcement is irrelevant. My argumentation stands or falls depending on the validity of the logic and evidence I put forth.

it IS relevant, very relevant mountainhare.
the evidence you have put forth so far has failed to prove any of your allegations.

 

[mountainhare]

Wow, I love your gymnastics routine, Leopold. I'm just curious, but when are you actually going to address the Amnesty International article, instead of conveniently ignoring it and repeating your request for 'evidence'?

owhere in this link does it mention the student being shot with a taser while in handcuffs.

Perhaps you should investigate the issue before attempting to address it? My link isn't the only one in existence, and if you'd done a little digging, you would have realized that the student was indeed repeatedly tasered while handcuffed.

In fact, I'll go one step better than merely providing a news source (as you'll no doubt question the credibility of any witness who contradict your worldview).
Here's a video of the event, captured on an observer's cell phone:
youtube.com/watch?v=AyvrqcxNIFs

or does it cite any library officials as witnesses.

There were numerous student witnesses. One does not need to be an 'official' in order to be a credible witness.

It has been established from witness testimony that:

1. The student was in the process of leaving the premises when the police arrived. Hence, there was no need for manhandling, or a tasering. (dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38958)

2. That the student was willing to be escorted off the premises by the police, and only 'resisted' when they manhandled him. (
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15731040/)

ntill you back up your opinions with evidence then, well, they are opinions.

Been there, done that. The Amnesty International article is more than enough to demonstrate that tasers are used primarily of weapons of coercion and intimidation in non-lethal situations.

not a single case of taser use has been presented where the "victim" wasn't breaking the law.

1. Doubtful. It really depends whether what acts of non-compliance are defined as 'legal' and 'illegal' in America.

2. 'Breaking the law' is not an excuse for employing the taser. If blinking were against the law, I doubt you'd justify taser use to stop a blinking suspect.
Quite simply, tasers should only be used as an alternative to deadly force.

links to tasers being used against children throwing books? or is this another opinion of yours?

The incident of the child who threw a book, and was tasered, was elaborated on in the Amnesty International article I posted.

The article you claimed to have read.

I always knew that you were full of shit. Now I solid proof that you engage in bald faced lying.

t IS relevant, very relevant mountainhare.

No, my credentials are not relevant. I've already explained why. Your repeated ad nauseum doesn't change a logic fallacy into a legitimate debating tactic.

the evidence you have put forth so far has failed to prove any of your allegations.

The Amnesty International article I provided is stone cold data which demonstrates that tasers are being used primarily as instruments of pain to force compliance in non-lethal situations. This was not their original intended use. Ideally, they are to be used as an alternative to lethal force.

 

[Baron Max]

What's really funny is that this argument is still going on ....have y'all noticed the poll figures? It's overwhelmingly in favor of cops using stun guns. Ain't that enough?

All of the rest of the posts are just nothing but hopeless rhetoric and isolated incidents ....which should be of little or no concern to anyone.

Baron Max

 

[leopold]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15731040/

this link, like the last, does NOT say the guy was handcuffed when tased.

Been there, done that. The Amnesty International article is more than enough to demonstrate that tasers are used primarily of weapons of coercion and intimidation in non-lethal situations.

like i said there are 1, possibly 2 instances they mention that warrent further investigation.

The incident of the child who threw a book, and was tasered, was elaborated on in the Amnesty International article I posted.
The article you claimed to have read.

i CLAIMED to have visited their website mountainhare.

No, my credentials are not relevant.

kind of says it all.
not a cop, no experience, but yet you "know".

 

[Baron Max]

The Amnesty International article I provided is stone cold data which demonstrates ......

Don't ya' think that an organization with a name like "Amnesty International" might be a little, tiny bit bias??

Baron Max

 

[leopold]

What's really funny is that this argument is still going on

no baron, whats really funny is that people with no experience "knows" whats up.

....have y'all noticed the poll figures? It's overwhelmingly in favor of cops using stun guns. Ain't that enough?

apparently not.

All of the rest of the posts are just nothing but hopeless rhetoric and isolated incidents ....which should be of little or no concern to anyone.

it's these isolated instances that sam and hare are going to drag to death.

 

[leopold]

if you guys are apalled by taser use check this shit out:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6014

now this is truely fucking outrageous.

 

[S.A.M.]

if you guys are apalled by taser use check this shit out:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6014

now this is truely fucking outrageous.

Mountainhare was right, you are so not reading the posts!

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1204986&postcount=64

 

[leopold]

Mountainhare was right, you are so not reading the posts!

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1204986&postcount=64

you ain't gonna tase me are ya?

edit
i read the first part of it.

 

[Baron Max]

Mountainhare was right, you are so not reading the posts!

Trying to stir up the heated shit between Hare and Leopold, Sam? ...LOL!

And I thought you did this because you're truly curious and interested????

And, Sam, have you noticed the poll figures? Overwhelmingly in favor of the cops using stun guns.

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

Trying to stir up the heated shit between Hare and Leopold, Sam? ...LOL!

And I thought you did this because you're truly curious and interested????

And, Sam, have you noticed the poll figures? Overwhelmingly in favor of the cops using stun guns.

Baron Max

Not stirring up shit Baron. He put up the link I had copy pasted in a previous post!! Which means he is not reading the posts, just arguing!!!

And hey, people were overwhelmingly in favor of Nazism in Germany, that doesn't make it alright.

 

[mountainhare]

leopold:

this link, like the last, does NOT say the guy was handcuffed when tased.

So what? Summary articles tend not to elaborate on every little detail. For Christ's sake, I posted the VIDEO of the incident under discussion. The video clearly shows the subject being tasered while handcuffed. Why do you continually display willful ignorance, and a refusal to review any sources which contradict your world view?

like i said there are 1, possibly 2 instances they mention that warrent further investigation.

Whether something 'warrants' investigation is fucking irrelevant to my assertion. The article I posted demonstrates a consistent trend of the police force resorting to using tasers as a weapon of coercion in non-lethal situations. You may find this acceptable. I do not. However, you cannot deny that the trend exists. Tasers ARE used systematically in non-lethal situations in order to force compliance.

i CLAIMED to have visited their website mountainhare.

No, you implied that you had read their article. I quote you as having said:
"i've been to the amnesty website. out of all the cases they present i agree with 1 possibly 2 of their findings of indiscriminate taser use."

The fact that you mentioned that you agreed with possibly a couple of their examples implies that you have read the article in totality. Otherwise, how can you comment?

Either way, I love how you admit that you have not read the Amnesty International article provided. After all, upon my submission of it, you claimed that it was not supporting evidence. How can you make such a claim, if you have not reviewed all of the data contained within the article I submitted as evidence!?

You have some nerve to claim that I have not submitted any evidence, when you consistently demonstrate a stubborn refusal to review any evidence that I put forward. Not only do you refuse to read the AI article, you also refuse to view the video which clearly demonstrates the student being tasered multiple times while handcuffed.

kind of says it all.
not a cop, no experience, but yet you "know".

Red herring. Appeal to authority. Credentialism.

One does not need to be a cop to have some notion of what consists of excessive force. If a policeman shoots to death a handcuffed individual, I'm sure that any individual, cop or not cop, would be able to accurately determine that as excessive force.

 

[S.A.M.]

you ain't gonna tase me are ya?

Nah. Use of physical force is the sign of a lack of imagination.

 

[mountainhare]

What's really funny is that this argument is still going on ....have y'all noticed the poll figures? It's overwhelmingly in favor of cops using stun guns. Ain't that enough?

1. Appeal to the majority logic fallacy. Merely because the majority support a particular measure does not make that measure ethical.

2. The poll is ambiguous. I support the use of tasers in life or death situations, where the only other alternative is lethal force. However, I don't agree with the use of tasers to force compliance in a non-lethal situation.

The problem here is that the latter situation is far more common than the former. Tasers are being systematically abused. Due to their 'non-lethal' status, cops think that this is a green light to resort to tasing the suspect, instead of employed more reasonable measures.

All of the rest of the posts are just nothing but hopeless rhetoric and isolated incidents

Silly nonsense. There is a clear trend of the police force abusing their taser privilege.

 

[leopold]

leopold:

So what? Summary articles tend not to elaborate on every little detail. For Christ's sake, I posted the VIDEO of the incident under discussion. The video clearly shows the subject being tasered while handcuffed. Why do you continually display willful ignorance, and a refusal to review any sources which contradict your world view?

i have watched the video 3 times.
the cops were trying to drag him out of the library in handcuffs.
they get tired of draging him and tell him to stand up twice.
they tased him. he stood up pretty quick.
my opinion? they should have warned him he was going to get tased.

edit
i have watched this video yet again and the cop did indeed tell the handcuffed man that he was about to get tased therefor i change my opinion to action justified.

Whether something 'warrants' investigation is fucking irrelevant to my assertion.

i disagree.

The article I posted demonstrates a consistent trend of the police force resorting to using tasers as a weapon of coercion in non-lethal situations.

no, this does not prove consistency

You may find this acceptable. I do not.

the guy in the video you posted was resisting arrest.
as far as tasing him i gave you my opinion.

However, you cannot deny that the trend exists.
Tasers ARE used systematically in non-lethal situations in order to force compliance.

and like i said all uses presented so far the 'victim' was breaking the law.

No, you implied that you had read their article. I quote you as having said:
"i've been to the amnesty website. out of all the cases they present i agree with 1 possibly 2 of their findings of indiscriminate taser use."

yes, that's what i said.

The fact that you mentioned that you agreed with possibly a couple of their examples implies that you have read the article in totality. Otherwise, how can you comment?

same as you, no experience.

Either way, I love how you admit that you have not read the Amnesty International article provided. After all, upon my submission of it, you claimed that it was not supporting evidence. How can you make such a claim, if you have not reviewed all of the data contained within the article I submitted as evidence!?

see above.

You have some nerve to claim that I have not submitted any evidence, when you consistently demonstrate a stubborn refusal to review any evidence that I put forward.

i reveiwed your one peice of evidence.

Not only do you refuse to read the AI article, you also refuse to view the video which clearly demonstrates the student being tasered multiple times while handcuffed.

see above.

One does not need to be a cop to have some notion of what consists of excessive force. If a policeman shoots to death a handcuffed individual, I'm sure that any individual, cop or not cop, would be able to accurately determine that as excessive force.

okay, the point is?

 

[leopold]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15731040/

in case you missed my edit i have watched this video a fourth time and the cop did indeed tell the handcuffed man that he was about to be tased. the man still refused.
based on this new revelation i change my opinion to action justified.

 

[MetaKron]

The answer to the original question is a nobrainer. I will summarize it:

It is much better for everyone in the long run if cops use taserguns instead of real guns. Sure shit happens occasionally and some innocent die, but there are way more people safed/less hurt on both sides (cops/offenders) by using them.

Also people die in under any circumstances. A guy can have a sizeure or heartattack during a normal arrest, you just never know. And usually tasers are/should be used when the offender is under the infuence of some kind of substance and can not be talked into behaving like a normal person.

Trouble is, they will use tasers AND guns. They treat the tasers like they are safe to play with and they are not.

 

[John99]

i would like to beat down gang members
i think its nice that lapd does it too
just dont get caught, morons

That is basically it Gustav, all it takes is for the citizens to stand behind them and support them and crime drops.

I seen it happen in New York, and of course it is the lower income people who bear the brunt of the crime.

There is a video around of a uni student who gets tasered 'because he wouldnt leave the school library and was violent about not leaving, so what you say? well the only problem is it was closed So in the end he gets tasered, and guess what? he is a Muslim...First frickin word in the whole news report. Also this guy looked like any other student, street clothes etc.

The media in U.S is real crap, they want to be politically correct but want to use racism for ratings, wouldn't it be nice if everything worked that way.

Oh and yes the camera was rolling, for the cash baby.

 

[cole grey]

Baron Max - polls do not provide facts, and do not answer any moral questions.

The ucla bruin article mentions the threats of tasering to someone who asked for a badge number - that, of course, is violent intimidation which is a form of abuse. This lends some support to the antitaser position. Would an officer say, "i'll shoot you, lady," or "I'll hit you"? Doubtful. Poorly trained, irresponsible people should not be allowed any weapons at all. If a taser is allowable because it is supposedly non-lethal, then I say that is ridiculous.
I still think police officers who respond to potentially lethal situations, should use them, but they need to be highly trained, and these ucla cops are not the cops that are familiar with possibly violent confrontations.
I think these guys should have just chilled and called real police officers, and they could go back to licensing bikes or whatever the campus police should be doing.

 

[leopold]

the man at UCLA was tased because the cops got tired of dragging his ass through the library. they asked him to stand up 2 or three times the man refused. they warned him he was about to get tased and told him to stand up 2 more times. he still refused. the cops tased his silly ass and he immediately stood up.

there are some things to consider here
1. the man was a UCLA student therefor he knew library policy.
2. when confronted by the police he became hostile.
3. he chose his actions on his own free will.

i'm beginning to wonder if this wasn't a staged incident.