New Testingstan

But Flagg, he could have had a gun! Think of the officers safety!

jehovah has released meteors

Is it one of those really slow ones that are like a symbol for interpersonal conflict?


Also I read comments for an article on eurogramer.... Dear me

meteors fall to earth at the speed of plot

to become meteorites

Sometimes its the moon so I guess it's allowed to be big in the sky for ages

Flagg wrote:

Oxymoron wrote:Because we all know one of the requirements for being a cop is to have a degree in badass, and not, y'know, wanting to preserve the rule of law or some useless junk like that.

Did I say that? They couldn't just tackle his dumbass and handcuff him like they used to do before the mighty and indispensable TASER was invented?

I'm not saying you said it, or trying to be apologizing or anything like that mind you. I just tend be irritated by the knee-jerk "fuck-the-police" reaction people seems to have each time a subject like this one is brought-up.
It's just that I put myself in the shoes of officers doing a shit job everyday which require them to go "tackle the dumbasses" as you say, an hazardous and potentially lethal activity with a shit pay, and so I fully understand why they would tend to take all the necessary precautions that are authorized by their hierarchy in order to preserve their own ass while on the field.
See, in a similar situation, with a crazy and unpredictable man in front of me, whom I don't know if he has a gun or any other concealed weapons, in the heat of action I know that if I had a Tazer myself and I was authorized to use by my hierarchy, I too would tend to use it : I'm not paid enough to take the risk of being stabbed by an asshole just in order to spare him soiling his pants and the random 0.5% chance of him dying of a cardiac arrest (in which case tackling him would be as likely of killing him anyway).
But mind you it's just me having no respect toward violent assholes in general and being an ignorant civilian who know nothing about American law-enforcement practices and customs outside of what I see on CSI or NCIS.

Oxymoron wrote: But mind you it's just me having no respect toward violent assholes in general and being an ignorant civilian who know nothing about American law-enforcement practices and customs outside of what I see on CSI or NCIS.

it's pretty much like dirty harry

Anyway, if you don't like Tazers, you can always use this cleaner solution :



Just be sure to respect the safety guidelines...

are you an agnostic yes or no? this is very important for my ability to objectively evaluate your arguments

and no lying to lull me into a false sense of peer acceptance!

Manchurian atheist

starku wrote:Manchurian atheist

manthiest

Oxymoron wrote:Anyway, if you don't like Tazers, you can always use this cleaner solution :



Just be sure to respect the safety guidelines...

What the fuck?

Anyways, America appears to have a massive problem with its police exceeding there authority and abusing the populace. 20+ years of "the war on drugs" and the increasing military nature of there police come home to roost.

Dirty Harry could never have imagined this.

Aaron wrote:

Oxymoron wrote:Anyway, if you don't like Tazers, you can always use this cleaner solution :



Just be sure to respect the safety guidelines...

What the fuck?

Anyways, America appears to have a massive problem with its police exceeding there authority and abusing the populace. 20+ years of "the war on drugs" and the increasing military nature of there police come home to roost.

Dirty Harry could never have imagined this.

more like robocop then?

how about demolition man

It's ironic that dirty Harry was considered a childish right wing fantasy when it came out
Now it's everyday and normal

Art affecting life

Somewhere in between I think.

I think it represented the frustration with prisoners having rights, much like how the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs opposed the charter.

Dunno how anyone could watch the films and not realize he was wrong and a dinosaur.

but clint eastwood rox

and he shot that child rapist garak

Dooey Jo wrote:are you an agnostic yes or no? this is very important for my ability to objectively evaluate your arguments

and no lying to lull me into a false sense of peer acceptance!

Fuck this thread. "Or the inability of SDNers to engage into a debate without getting confrontational."

Seriously, fuck it : someone post an interesting argument, which may be correct or incorrect, but still interesting ; and what is the first thing they do ? They try to flay him alive because his argument happen to touch their sacrosanct mental boxes and how they classify themselves and others. Digging ideological trenches, putting their fingers in their ears and chanting "LA-LA-LAAA-CAN'T-HEAR-YOOOUUUUU...".

Can you remind me what is supposed to make them superior to the "Replubitards" they so deride ?

Aaron wrote:

Oxymoron wrote:Anyway, if you don't like Tazers, you can always use this cleaner solution :



Just be sure to respect the safety guidelines...

What the fuck?

It's a flashball, a gun that shoot a rubber bullet of large caliber (40 or 50mm, I'm not certain) with the same power on impact at ten meter than the punch from a heavyweight boxer. If cleaner to use than the Taser in theory (if you don't mind the bruises and the blood, that is), the problem is that training is deficient and that officers in France, instead of shooting on the thorax as the usage guidelines fixed by the ministry recommend, tend to systematically over-compensate vertically their shots and get people shot on the face (which is strictly forbidden by the guidelines as it can very easily result in permanent blindness if an eye is shot - which sadly has happened to dozens of people in the past years).
So back home there's the same kind of debate about it than with the Tazer.

Zod wrote:Well we can already rule out Uraniun.

it's me, i'm the cop witht he taser

uraniun235 wrote:

Zod wrote:Well we can already rule out Uraniun.

it's me, i'm the cop witht he taser

pics

Oxymoron wrote:Can you remind me what is supposed to make them superior to the "Replubitards" they so deride ?

hey man i had to defend a guy when people were going "are you sum kind of craytionist?!?"

because he was arguing with numbers and logic against board dogma you see

and that is so taboo that we just have ignore everything he says and bring his morals into question


personally i'm pretty much gonna keep laughing at every claim about high debating standards on TEO until someone other than

well ME

at least starts pointing out the daftness of "roffle no negative proofs here plx"

of course that guy sort of did but he will soon be driven off

Dude this guff has been obvious for years

yeah it was like back in 2006 or something

Oh shi-

i still remember when chewie posted a dumb link and DW jumped up his ass about how clearly this meant that chewie was a habitual reader of the website and made the thread about chewie

Oxymoron wrote:See, in a similar situation, with a crazy and unpredictable man in front of me, whom I don't know if he has a gun or any other concealed weapons, in the heat of action I know that if I had a Tazer myself and I was authorized to use by my hierarchy, I too would tend to use it : I'm not paid enough to take the risk of being stabbed by an asshole just in order to spare him soiling his pants and the random 0.5% chance of him dying of a cardiac arrest (in which case tackling him would be as likely of killing him anyway).
But mind you it's just me having no respect toward violent assholes in general and being an ignorant civilian who know nothing about American law-enforcement practices and customs outside of what I see on CSI or NCIS.

I think part of it is that it's still unclear as to what the actual risk of death is from being hit by a Taser. If it was a guaranteed no-harm-ever weapon, I would support using it before trying to tackle someone, because people can be seriously injured by that. I'd also definitely support an officer using a Taser in that situation if he was the only one there and action had to be taken, because a one-on-one struggle is bad news. (In the US, the officer would probably be far more worried about having his gun wrestled from him than about a knife being drawn out of nowhere.)

Neither the MSNBC article nor the Oregonian article really effectively conveys the situation, though. How many officers were present? How erratic was the man behaving? How big is he? Did he respond to attempts at communication? Was he running around or did he seem content to face off with the officers? How tense was it, really?

I'm uneasy about resorting to Tasers too quickly in part because, from my admittedly limited perspective, it seems like instances where Taser use leads to death seem correlated with people behaving erratically. Despite that, though, it's difficult for me to judge whether or not it was the best course of action for these officers in this situation.

i'm amused at how quickly this discussion turned into one about tasers