Slashdot Mirror
Taser International Wins Lawsuit to Change Cause of Death
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Taser International recently started a legal campaign against medical examiners who claimed tasers contributed to the cause of death for several people. On Friday, an Ohio judge ruled in favor of the stun gun manufacturer (free registration may be required). While they do have a number of scientific studies on which they establish their claims, it's interesting that the alternate cause of death they champion — excited delirium — appears only in police reports on the deaths of difficult or drug-addled inmates, not in medical textbooks. Of course, that may change soon — Taser is funding and promoting research on the subject. Coroner reports such as the ones in this case contributed to the UN's opinion that taser use is torture."
Sounds like one of those 18th century list of causes of death, where they didn't actually know the reason so they threw in some medical buzzwords of the day such as hysteria.
Just fire up the sidearm electrocution device.
It's torture my any means.
It's unlawful restraint.
We don't do this (legally) to animals in public, although some do in private, but they'll be dealt with accordingly. So, given that one simple fact, then why should humans be subjected to it?
Don't tase me, bro.
A taser has darts or clips with wires which are remotely launched.
A stun gun has two electrodes and requires the attacker to press the electrodes to the victim's skin.
VERY few use actual tasers, and even fewer know what a taser really is.
Whether something is torture is not (or rather, should not be) decided from whether or not it will actually kill you.
Undoubtedly, pulling someone's teeth out is torture, yet it's not going to kill you. The relevant part is the wanton quantities of pain involved.
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
Failure to maintain adequate breathing, or something like that.
Over here (aus) tasers and MACE sprays are the new thing. Suddenly every police force needs them to handle drug crazed people.
I'm sure it's got nothing to do with the push for middle aged women and people of random ethnic backrounds to become police officers. Apparently the police force should reflect society. If that means a 45 year old, 5 foot tall woman needs a taser when she confronts a fight at a bar, then that's ok.
Apparently..
In America, lawyers get to determine how the human body works.
Not sure this is a step up from the Catholic Church getting to decide, but I hear your President has God whisper advice directly into his ear, so...
Yeah, those things probably can kill occasionally. But so can kicking, punching, shooting, even restraining. I'd rather get tasered than kicked, punched, or shot, and if they didn't have a taser, those would be the alternatives.
On the other hand, I think if police use a taser or other electrical device, it should be treated just like kicking or punching by the legal system and needs to be justified accordingly. And I think it's wrong for the company to try to suppress these incidents. They are most likely real, we just need to debate whether they are acceptable.
Now we have a weapons manufacturer dictating medical procedure and reporting.
*Sniff* *Sniff* I smell bullshit....
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Apparently excited delerium. is a very specialized mortal condition that only occurs when you're in police custody.
Right.
You can always find a dumb judge in America.
A power company lineman died today from excited delirium when he accidentally came in contact with a live power line.
Co-workers are reported as saying he didn't appear to be excited or delirious prior to his unfortunate accident, although witnesses do report that his body appeared to become quite excited at the moment of contact with the fatal current.
Full story at 11.
Ummm...yeah...
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
...chronic depression will be renamed "melancholia," and loss of consciousness due to orthostatic hypotension will from now on be known as "the vapors."
This space available.
Voltage Facts
THE VOLTAGE MYTH
Stun guns rely on voltage to cause pain that will stop an attacker only a percentage of the time. That is why the Air TASER® Weapon has been discontinued. The new Advance Tasers do not rely on voltage. They utilize an advance technolgy that totally interrupts the body's electrical system which is effective 100% of the time.
The next question is WHAT is the advance technology being used?
Someone needs to tell these courts that companies working with/for/owned by "Loyal Bushies" are literally above-the-law, and shouldn't have to deal with these distractions as they Keep America Safe For Their Business Plan.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
DON'T TASE ME, BRO'!!
Wait a sec ... is that a Glock?!!
DON'T SHOOT ME, BRO'!! TASE ME, TASE ME, BRO'!!
Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
Actually, I think Taser stopped requiring cops to tase each other in training when a cop died after being tased.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Uh huh, and that explains why Taser International is threatening to sue coroners who cite it as a contributing factor to cause of death. It's not because the product kills people every now and then and they might not sell as many tasers to cops if that becomes widely known. It's the cops they care about! That thin blue line between civilization and chaos!
Look, I think everyone agrees that cops need to be able to subdue violent people with as little lethal force used as possible. To the extent that tasers, stun guns, etc. contribute to that goal, fine. The point is that Taser International's commercial interests may not necessarily coincide with that goal (i.e. the product can be abused, or should not be used in some circumstances), and Taser International may not be interested in owning up to that fact for marketing reasons.
Coroners, who are obligated to determine cause of death as accurately as possible, should be able to opine that the use of a taser contributed to cause of death when that is in fact the case, end of story. That is, assuming you want cops to be accountable. It was interesting to scroll down the comments in TFA to note the number of people who apparently think cops should just be able to pull people off the street and kill them in custody.
Disclaimer: I am a police officer in Florida. I use the Taser. I do not own stock in Taser International.
To say that a Taser didn't *contribute* to the deaths is probably wrong. To say that a Taser *caused* the deaths is almost certainly wrong.
The amperage on a Taser is too low by a few orders of magnitude to cause death by electrocution. It will cause central nervous system disruption, which is very uncomfortable, and causes some unusual side effects.
I've been shot with a Taser. Not a stun-gun, a full-fledged Taser with the barbed prongs and ranged shot. I took a five second burst of 50,000 volts. It isn't fun, but I'd prefer it to pepper spray (which I've also been hit with). At least it's over in five seconds, instead of three hours.
During the shot, the Taser causes you to literally scream out all the air in your body in about two seconds. You spend three seconds trying to force out air that isn't there. In someone full of drugs or with pre-existing medical problems, this can definitely pose a risk.
As a police officer, I've had six situations where using the Taser has saved me from serious bodily injury. In all but one case, the defendant was immediately back on his feet after I helped him up, and quickly back in good spirits. In two cases, they spent the ride to jail joking with me. In one case, the defendant had to go to the hospital due to a cocaine overdose. He lived due to timely medical intervention, but we expected him to be in bad shape and had an ambulance standing by to assist the minute we had him secure.
As for calling the Taser torture, let me put it this way: I would willingly be shot with a Taser again in a training exercise. I've willingly subjected other people to it after feeling its effects. I would *not* willingly be shot with pepper spray/mace again. I have not and will not willingly subject other people to it after feeling its effects. The Taser is a valuable, but dangerous weapon that must be treated with caution and only used appropriately. Pepper spray is torture.
It can be used to retrain minds. We are learning machines with positive and negative feedback. All negative feedback is pain of some sort. I would personally rather be 'fixed' clockwork orange style than be stuck in prison, useless to, and a burden on, society.
Its not the technology of the taser, or the practice of using pain, that is bad here. Its the mindset of *some* of the people using it. Letting the tech divert us from holding them accountable is a mistake.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
The credibility of pure anonymous posts here is very low. If your comment is modded down you may want to open an account and respond using it. In the future you can continue to defend taser, promote the technology and educate under your account.
Thank you for not understanding anything. The main problem is that the threshold for when this potentially fatal method is applied in a loooong row of cases have been shown to be incredibly low. In quite a few cases it has been shown to be the *first* thing the officer does when encountering resistance. If you're equating tasering someone with shooting them, I sincerely do hope shooting people have never been the first reaction to resistance where you live.
Tasers should be outlawed; they do not do anything you couldn't do before with a gun or a truncheon, other than give the you the opportunity to torture your victim on the spot in order to masturbate your poor ego, without risking any punishment for it.
Don't test the teasers bro
Tazer is a For Profit company their role is to market and sell a product that is an alternative to firearms. In order to do that they need to market their products as a better alternative that the use of guns. Their marketing campaign tries to encite fear in law enforcement and political officals of the problems that go along with using more lethal firearms. They state their products are less lethal and safer reducing the paperwork and lawsuits police will be invovled in. Because Tazer training touts the safety fot ehir products and how littl eharm it does to the individual they are trying to restrain, police have been given the impression that if one shot with a Tazer is not enough then they can discharge several of them on the same individual with not additional complications.
"Don't Beat Me, Bro!"
All in all, I'd rather have the force continuum be:
"batons > pistols"
Tasers are too much like Extrajudicial Torture for my tastes.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
What if we lived in a fascist country and nobody knew it?
"Fascism could better be called 'corporatism', for it is merely the merging of state power with corporate power." -- attributed to Benito Mussolini, the Italian dictator who "invented" fascism.
Fascism is: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." -- The 1983 American Heritage Dictionary.
"The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power." -- Vice President Henry Wallace, April 9, 1944.
We don't control the "justice" system -- it is run, like the entire gov't, primarily for the benefit of corporations and their wealthy owners.
We shouldn't be surprised at Taser's actions, they're little different than what the RIAA does. The real question is, what are you doing to stop this creeping fascism?
Meanwhile we find out that drug companies have been using the full weight of statistical analysis and selective reporting to represent ineffective drugs as being effective. The result is that independent organisations like the NIH and, in the UK, the NICE, have to spend to counter the propaganda.
Perhaps we need to take a leaf out of the book of the Byzantine empire - which was around a lot longer than the British Empire was or the US Empire is likely to last - and restrict the maximum size of any corporation to the point at which it cannot dictate to elected governments. But who is the "we" who any longer have the power to do it?
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Yes, the theory is that the taser is used instead of a gun, in the situations where otherwise they'd have to shoot. Too bad it doesn't seem to work that way. It seems to work more like: when they would have used a gun, they'll still use a gun, but now have the taser for the rest of the time.
Off the top of my head, I remember such gems as:
- guy with a medical emergency calls 911, cops show up first and tase him in his bed. Apparently they thought he lunged at them. While lying on a bed across the room.
- student doesn't have his library card at the library, and is already leaving (so wtf of a danger did he pose?), campus security guards tase him repeatedly.
- some idiot decides to streak naked, gets tased. I can think of at least two of these.
- schoolkid threatens to cut himself with a piece of broken glass, gets tased.
- 12 year old schoolgirl is found skipping school, gets tased.
- 75 year old grandma insists too much to visit an old friend in another nursing home, a cop gets called and tases her.
- guy gets agitated after being kept IIRC for 12 hours without access to food, water or his medicine in an airport, cops tase him to death. Literally: tased repeatedly, until he dies of heart attack.
Etc, etc, etc.
Here's my question for all the "well, it's better than being shot" gang: exactly which of those would have warranted a bullet instead? No, seriously, I'm curious.
AFAIK not even in Stalin's USSR or Mao's China would they shoot a sick guy for just calling an ambulance. And no country in the world takes school _that_ seriously as to shoot a 12 year old for skipping school.
No, it's already used in _addition_ to the gun, not instead of.
And here's a funnier thought: we already have plenty of evidence that it's used repeatedly. Some even on camera. In some cases it seems to be police stupidity: they see a guy spasming after the jolt, and they think it's some kind of resisting arest, so they do it again. In some cases it seems genuine torture. They've been given free hand to use the taser, so they'll cause you some more pain just because they don't like you.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Yes but there is a common cause to these deaths, police intervention with taser. Calling it something else is a lie.
At the same time, it's nice of you to bring up previous quack explanations like hysteria, especially female hysteria which was cured by rape.
No he doesn't. He explains the difference between them quit well actually.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
Years ago I was responsible for designing a safety interlock system on a piece of high voltage test equipment, and I worked with an officer of the UK H&S executive to achieve compliance.
H&SE have evidence of people being killed by shocks of as little as 2.5mA, and have reason to believe that there is no lower limit. The actual cause is heart fibrillation which can be set off by a very small current in the wrong place.
The standard set for equipment like electric fences for cattle is based on this research, but it is statistical - that is to say, the overall likelihood of deaths from this cause is very small bot non-zero. People fit and active enough to walk across fields are unlikely to die as a result of contacting an electric fence, but people with heart conditions need to be very careful.
In the case of the taser, the electric shock is deliberately caused and the victim has no opportunity to avoid it. This is a different situation . The law needs to reflect the scientific evidence that electric shocks can cause death because otherwise a police officer may be tempted to use on in a non-threatening situation. It must be possible to prosecute police who behave recklessly, and legislating that certain technology is not dangerous removes this protection from the citizen. Unless you are one of those judges who believe that all policemen are totally honest and always have the best interests of society at heart, in which case I have a job for you in China.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
"As for calling the Taser torture, let me put it this way: I would willingly be shot with a Taser again in a training exercise."
Just because YOU are willing to consent to something doesn't mean it still isn't an act of TORTURE.
Go over to some of the BDSM websites on the 'net, and you will find people who consent to, and actually enjoy being tied up and hit with a cattle prod.
That doesn't mean it isn't torture.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Because I know the folks at Taser International have my best interests as a citizen at heart, and are not concerned with their own profit and liability. Seriously, I've heard law enforcement officers claim tasers don't kill people. Maybe they don't always, but they can kill and injure people. It's shooting needles into a person and hitting them with electricity. It's not safe. It can kill. It may be less lethal than a bullet. It may be more effective at subduing someone than wrestling with them. But it's still got the potential danger there. Ignore that at....the peril of the citizenry.
This raises the important question:
Should Tasers be regulated by the FDA as a medical device? And exactly what MEDICAL TRAINING is provided to enable the user to make the proper diagnosis before prescribing repeated debilitating electrical shocks?
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
I rank Taser International right up there with Diebold, DirecTV and the RIAA as organizations that regularly misuse American law to suppress competition and legitimate discussion of their products and services. This is not a matter of using the legal system to provide redress of grievance ... it's a form of quasi-legal censorship. It needs to be stopped, particularly when it comes to TI's intimidation of medical examiners and other State employees who are performing vital public services. This is wrong any way you look at it.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Pull the other one. I would willingly be shot with a Taser again in a training exercise. This is the main thrust. Being tasered in a controlled setting, where the subject is fit, not under the influence of any drugs (legal or illegal), calm, not under stress, and is aware it's going to happen and can prepare for it *is completely different* than when it's used in an adversarial situation, with people who might have medical conditions, or are otherwise not cops in training.
Time to manufacture conductive underwear then. Just short the tazer and avoid the trouble.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
The problem with Taser use is not a single Taser shot to stop a potential attacker. It is when out of control police Tase someone repeatedly for "failure to comply with a lawful order" or just as revenge for striking an officer. The problem is when it is used as a coercion method like beating someone over the head with a phone book, or performing a choke hold used to be.
The problem with Tasers is that it is hard to detect when the bad cops use them like this. But when the cause of death is "excited delirium" (yeah, its not like hospitals wouldn't have noticed this if it really existed) you can be pretty sure that a bad cop used some inappropriate method of coercion or restraint.
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
This seems to be more a legal effort to come up with the conclusion that tasers are not related to suspects deaths, than looking for the question on how someone died.
Probably in the companies best interest, but it does seem to be introducing more weasel words than the world really needs.
I've always been a bit ambivalent on this. I think it's quite silly for the causes of death to be changed, as we all know well enough that getting hit by a pretty healthy jolt of electricity certainly could result in death, especially for those whose health is already compromised by other factors.
On the other hand, it is true that police are able to use nonlethal force in place of lethal force in some scenarios (and Taser use is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, nonlethal). This is a good thing.
I think a good way to treat this would be as we would treat the use of a punch, kick, nightstick, or other form of painful but nonlethal force. If an officer were to punch, kick, or whack someone with a nightstick simply for "mouthing off" or refusing to cooperate without mounting any physical threat, that officer is guilty of a crime and should be punished. On the other hand, if the person is attempting to attack physically, the officer would be well-justified in using necessary force to defend him/herself. Why not develop some reasonable guidelines for the thing, and then, you know, actually hold cops accountable if they don't follow them?
Well, I can dream, can't I? Now back to this video of a cuffed suspect getting tasered repeatedly.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
hmm, he sure was more docile once they'd killed him.
weird that it took them three minutes or so to notice that they'd killed him.
it appears to me that they are all overweight, dull-minded individuals just following their predetermined routine. most disturbing to think that such people are in positions of power.
Requiem for the American Dream
WARNING: Do not look into Taser with remaining heart.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Not to mention that many people (in power) still consider tasers 'safe', meaning that the 'What about my job?' part of the thought process just isn't there. I certainly wouldn't want to be shot in the leg or have a baton jammed into my eye by an overzealous traffic cop, but at least I know it's less likely to happen than being dropped by a taser.
I just read Slashdot for the articles.
I wonder what happens if other countries legally decide that tasers can kill people? How many other countries allow tasers to be used by police etc?
Call for backup. If life is really endangered, deadly force is justified.
The problem here is that Taser is pretending their stun gun is not an application of deadly force. Honest police officers are being encouraged to use a device that might kill. Dishonest police officers think they have a toy they abuse people with and that they might even get away with murder. The lie is a crime and Taser should be punished for it. It's malicious corporate behavior and those responsible should be stripped of their ill gotten gains. A class action lawsuit will come from this and it should target the company, it's officers and prominent investors. There would be no case if the company was not lying and simply admitted that they made a mistake instead of trying to cover up the evidence of that mistake. A bigger problem is that the harm they have done is not something that can be repaired with money. No amount of money the company has can make up for loss of life and honest policemen won't who have unintentionally killed won't get their sleep back.
your left testicle torn off, or your right testicle chopped away?
Nice false dichotomy there, buddy.
"Do you trust the police?"
Mostly, yes. There will always be bad apples (which is why the FBI nearly took over the New Orleans PD years ago) but by FAR the problem isn't the po-po, but my wonderful fellow citizens who rob, rape, steal, and do home invasions. Police dealing with me have always been professional. Can't say that for civilians...
BTW I have a wonderful method for not getting tased/maced/clubbed or shot by the cops. I NEVER start shit with them. I'm of the opinion most people who refuse to behave in a mellow and self-controlled manner and assault cops deserve a good beatdown because they volunteered for it.
I expect to live in an orderly and secure society and I don't care too much if those who would disturb that get hurt for their efforts. The Thin Blue Line protects me, and is therefore good.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Bullshit unless you can provide examples.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Taser torture? What is a gun? Is that not torture? Or mace or pepper spray or tear gas? How about an insult?
I NEVER start shit with them.
Me neither! That's why I'm always VERY careful never to:
- be black
- be poor
- have a funny haircut
- ask questions
- take pictures
- say the wrong thing
- vote for the wrong people
- etc.
The alternative to the stun gun is a 9mm bullet. If stun guns infrequently cause deaths, bullets quite frequently do. The taser is intended as a non lethal alternative to a pistol. If it is, in actuality, merely a much less lethal alternative, then it still has value in law enforcement and personal protection.
If you'd used the valid link, you'd have noticed that "female hysteria" was treated via masturbation: '"pelvic massage" â" manual stimulation of the woman's genitals by the doctor to "hysterical paroxysm", which is now recognized as orgasm.'
Not all masturbation is rape, you know.
No, saying all "excited delirium" deaths involve a taser is a lie.
Take, for example, this one - among others - where police used physical force (nightsticks) and the listed cause of death was excited delirium.
That may or may not make it better - these are still controversial deaths occurring during police encounters - but your beliefs on these matters are substantially more narrow than the actual facts, and I'll thank you for not confusing one with the other.
UN opinions should be considered torture because they often cause emotional pain to any intelligent people who read them.
Right, let's forget tasers because they're "torture" and go back to only bashing in skulls with night sticks and blowing holes in people with handguns.
Research on pigs has shown that tasers cause erratic heart rhythms when the barbs form a line that crosses the heart. Little surprise, because the heart's rhythm works on electric pulses.
In Canada we had more than one case of death after tasering, including a polish immigrant.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
And I find it interesting that you're criticizing expressed skepticism of an "officer's" "experience" as stated on an anonymous Internet forum. Perhaps you should reconsider your handle?
#!
Misleading. TASER is a brand name for a manufacturer of electroshock weaponry (or more euphemistically "Electronic Control Devices") The company's literature always refers to them as TASER devices, TASER products, TASER ECDs, or TASER [model name] -- in other words, the name is never pluralized/lowercased like "tasers," in the way that you do in your post. However, in common usage you can tase people with tasers, either through propoelled wire electrodes or through direct contact ("drive stun") mode. TASER devices can usually either be used in either mode. They aren't two different devices, they're the same ECD, just with or without the "TASER cartridge" inserted. Of course this is easy to verify.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
Like anything, even water, a Taser can be used as torture. But that's not its purpose. It was made to subdue people in a (mostly) non-lethal fashion. If you are suspect of a violent crime resisting arrest in a violent manner, then I support the use of a Taser on you. That's because it's much more human than shooting you with a
But Tasers are not perfect. They can kill. They are being overused not because the police are sadistic monsters, but because they have been taught that Tasers are non-lethal, that they do not kill. They have been taught that they are nothing more than cattle prods for humans. Nothing can be further from the truth. If police would treat Tasers as the potentially deadly weapons they are, they would be used far less frequently.
They should NOT be used when the suspect is merely acting goofy, or asking beligerent questions of a Democrat Politician, or wearing earbuds so you don't hear the cops, etc. They should only be used when you pose an immediate danger to the police or public. I suspect half the use of Tasers don't meet this level.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Bullshit unless you can provide examples.
Seriously? You (a) haven't heard of any of the above examples and (b) can't figure out how to use a search engine? Here - first hit for USC Taser I can't be arsed to search for the others, but look on Google. The one with the guy in the airport happened only about two months ago.
My method also worked just fine when I was a long-haired, bearded biker before being one was trendy. :)
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
How is the medical opinion of experts (right or wrong) a judicial matter at all? Isn't it akin to taking me to a court because I published an erroneous theorem?
Isn't the way to correct such things is the "usual way" of doing science? But then maybe litigating is the usual way these days.
Taser deaths are murder in the 3rd degree at least.
Taser International is fighting a future criminal case through these civil cases now.
Three cops tasering someone at once is a murder attempt.
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
Works pretty well, its like screaming "Don't stab me! I'm a hemophiliac!" You would not believe the stabbings I've gotten out of that way.
In other news, gun manufacturers are arguing to have 'gun violence' reclassified into 'high velocity, projectile related trauma'.
Let me start out with stating that I support the use of taser devices by police. I believe that having an intermediary between "come peacefully" and "I will have to kill you" is a very good tool to give to officers.
My problem is that these deaths weren't just exacerbated by tasers, they were caused by them. If the officer had used a firearm instead, it would've been death caused by gun. Why is this any different?
I am not a police officer and one reason that I'm not is a heart condition that would prevent me from fulfilling my duties as an officer. The same condition that would cause me to die if I was on the receiving end of a taser! Now you may like to say that it would be my heart condition that was the cause of said taser related death but I have to think that a simple restraining would keep me alive. If someone shoots me with a taser, I will die and I damn well want my death certificate to say "death by taser".
It's high time that people (and that includes police officers who are in fact just people) start referring to tasers as "less lethal" weapons instead of "non-lethal". That's what this lawsuit is about. The manufacturers don't want people thinking that these things can and do kill, they just want people to think that they are preferable to firearms.
So keep carrying tasers as they do have their use. Just make sure that everyone knows that they are less-lethal weapons. They do kill. Oh and don't tase me bro. I don't want to die.
P.S. I'm also pro gun but I don't think we should gratuitously shoot people with them either.
The tasered man at the airport is on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IJqdL40lvU.
He appears pretty agitated in the video and engages in some vandalism, but he is unarmed.
After watching the video, I'd agree that restraining him was probably necessary, but there were at least four security guards on the scene. They should have been able to handle him without a taser. Also watch the right guard at around 3:50 into the video. It looks like he hits the guy repeatedly with his club, at a time when he is clearly under control.
Overall, the security uses a completely unreasonable degree of force. If they did not have a taser, I can easily imagine them beating their victim to death.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Cite please.
BD Phone Home!
Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.
For anyone else that needs a refresher - http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/277038 , the incident involving a Polish man who was detained for 10 hours and immediately tased to death when the cops appeared.
What's inappropriate is that four athletic looking, young police officers didn't attempt to calm or subdue this man, and immediately tased him to death. Thus far, I've yet to see any evidence--including the immigrant in Vancouver--where any inappropriate actions took place.
That's not true. If the subject is bound hand and foot, and gagged, perhaps. Otherwise, if only handcuffs have been used, they can still be kicking officers, biting, drawing blood, etc. If they don't settle down, a taser is perfectly reasonable. Also, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a case where the officer doesn't first say, "Settle down or you are going to be tased." Often this warning is issued repeatedly before action is taken. At that point, the use of the taser was clearly the coice of the belligerant individual, and I don't feel bad if they pretty much choose to be tased.
This is already done in every police academy in the country (if there are any exceptions I'd be very suprised). My brother-in-law is in the academy now, and being tased and shot with pepper spray are required for every officer. Police officers all know what it's like to be tased, and it does lead to more reasonable uses. It is also why taser use isn't torture today. The cops know what they are doing, and I think you see less abuse of the taser than you used to see when beatings were used.
This is probably true. Taser does seem to get carried away with its advertising. However, every police officer I know does understand that Tasers may, in rare circumstances, kill someone. However, they use them under the assumption that a Taser is less lethal than a gun, and that is probably true. I know some police departments that carry only Tasers now instead of guns. This is especially common on forces dealing primarilly with college campuses, because on those you are likely to have a lot of semi-violent drunks, fighters, people possibly on drugs, and generally youthful people that can run fast and throw a hard punch. However, you don't have too many hardened criminals carrying heavy weaponry. So tasers are a good way to subdue people who are probably stronger and in better shape than the cops without having to use a gun.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
I don't see why the company is trying so hard to suppress this. It's not like it's their fault, they could easily just blame their customers for misusing the device.
If they just (successfully) dropped the blame on the law enforcement and campus cops and civilians for misusing the device, it would actually help them and the people that might some day get hurt.
By trying to make their device seem somehow less dangerous, they're doing the most irresponsible thing.
There's also no point to this approach, there's no telling anyone who knows the least about the effects of electricity on the human body that it's not going to ever kill people.
A 9 volt battery can easily kill a person if the resistance of the skin is defeated, and tens of thousands of volts has no problem overcoming that resistance.
Maybe it's about time someone designed a full-body faraday shield for those average, every day people who do nothing wrong to run around in all day so they won't have to worry about some asshole cop believing tasers are magical tools that harmlessly make people stop 'resisting arrest'.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
What the hell are we supposed to use to control and defend ourselves from unruly criminals? Strong language?!
Oh wait..... The UN already determined that to be torture - No joke.
Let see.....
Nightsticks: Effective only if you get a good, strong headshot. If you don't incapacitate the criminal, it just makes them madder.
Guns: Usually kill the criminal. Not always a bad thing, but they leave you open to frivolous lawsuits from people who think that criminals should have rights while they commit a crime.
Strong Language: Determined to be torture by the UN. Apparently, they claim it's torture to make someone feel bad by insulting them.
Begging: Usually ineffective.
So let's see - It's torture to use a Taser to defend yourself from a criminal, but not torture to allow yourself to be subjected to violence from a criminal?
Screw the U.N. - I'll just shoot the worthless bastard in the nuts. It won't kill him, but he'll wish it had.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Ok, so... cops are bad, RIAA is bad, Microsoft is bad, paying for software or music is bad, Bush is bad, upholding any law is bad, copyrights are bad... Way to be an asshat there. You think you're special just because you take the side of the police? You didn't provide any facts in your post, right after you bashed the parent poster for not providing facts, and then you expect to get modded up? Come back when you can make an actual argument.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
In todayâ(TM)s world, maintaining self-confidence involves the need for self-protection. For independent, self-reliant women, the TASER® C2 is an effective personal protection device that fits any lifestyle. Ok, that I can go with... but "fits any lifestyle"? Hmm... Next slide: THERE WHEN I CAN'T BE
The commitment to protect the family, is more than something rational. It is innate. What is rational is taking steps to reconcile the instinct to protect, to always be there when needed. This seems to be advocating giving tasers to friends and family. Still not too bad... FASHION WITH A BITE
Let innovative design, unparalleled performance, and breakthrough style help you make a statement. Who says safety can't be stylish? Ok, WTF. What does it say about our society that we have designer fucking tasers? TASER MPH HOLSTER
mixing music with security
Play your favorite songs while on the go, with this combination TASER® C2 Holster and easy-to-use music player. The 1 GB TASER MPH Holster offers you both security and music while on the go. Yes... we are talking about a combination. Taser. And. MP3. Player.
Really, we can't be far off from this kind of stuff. (For those who don't know, that was one of their April Fools products.)
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Heh. Dude, just because you don't know about it, doesn't make it a lie, ya know? I hate to break the illusion that the world revolves around you, and that truth or falsehood get judged by your whims or wishes. Sorry. Want a link?
- UCLA cops taser ID-less student
- UCLA Taser victim sues university
Have more links. Off The Register alone, since I can't be arsed to do even more searching for you:
- Texas cops taser diabetic seizure man
- School tasers naked, oil-smeared student
- Taser-happy cops floor suicidal six-year-old (It also mentions the 12 year old girl.)
- US cops taser battling granny
Etc.
So basically, just because you're uninformed, doesn't make it a lie. The fact that you wrote the above idiocy without even bothering to google first, though... now _that_ speaks volumes. Heh.
But I assume again you won't have the literacy skills to make it this far, so never mind
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
You do realize that "the citizenry" has more than one opinion, and that you're part of it?
So -- if you don't agree with what you see as the slashdot groupthink, you're obviously (1) misperceiving that groupthink, and/or (2) offending individuals (like yourself) who don't subscribe. What's more, though, the perception that there is a unified groupthink is mistaken. The Linux geeks and the Apple geeks are still two different camps. The OSS folks want to see copyright laws enforced (with enlightened self interest encouraging adoption of open source terms where appropriate), while the RMS groupies want to see copyright for software fundamentally modified. There are plenty of folks around here who think Ron Paul's a nutjob -- go look at any political article for proof; while the RP contingent is vocal, they're very, very far from alone. Almost everyone will agree that fair use is misunderstood, but some folks will claim that it's really meant to be a get-out-of-jail-free card for noncommercial (but otherwise outright) theft, while others will say that it's misunderstood by those who see it as anything other than a last-ditch legal defense with tightly limited scope. To be sure, there are folks who take any of the positions you caricature as part of the local groupthink -- but individuals taking all of those positions are far more rare.
Now please stop the ad hominem attacks against a strawman "groupthink" that doesn't even exist.
They both work in the EXACT SAME MANNER, by depleting your ATP levels via use of an electrical current to overstimulate your muscles and burn energy at insanely fast speeds. They're both 'tasers' or 'stun guns' in the sense they achieve the exact same effect.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Remember what Ben Franklin said about security to protect freedom.
I'm a Paramedic. I have had a lot of contact and experience with people who've been shot by Tasers. I'll tell you my experiences, but I'm posting anonymously as I could probably lose my job over this.
Mainly, I'd like to address a number of commonly-held theories, and I'd like to help either debunk or promote them.
First off, we need to be clear about what Excited Delirium is. It is not a disease or an illness or a description of an injury. It is a description of a behavioural state with an attempt at describing the underlying organopathology. I've seen first-hand the ED state. People screaming, fighting at invisible dogs biting them, screaming that their father is raping them, yelling that they're going to kill me, etc. These are people who are, without question, completely out of their mind. It is horrible to watch. It is heartbreaking to watch. It is terrifying to know that the police officers that I serve alongside and respect so much would do this to someone.
Next, let's talk about Tasers hurting people. I've had a number of calls to scenes where someone has been Tased. My role there is to ensure that no officers are injured, insure safety, and then treat the subject. Tasers enter your skin through small barbs, about the diameter of a 14ga IV needle. The barbs tend to cause very little injury in and of themselves; they typically stay in the skin. Taking them out is usually a painless procedure for the patient. If the barb is in bone, above the shoulders, or in the nipples or genitals, I'll leave them in and have them removed at the hospital. I have never once seen anyone who's been injured by a Taser.
I'll say that again because it's important: I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYONE WHO'S BEEN INJURED BY BEING TASED.
I have, however, seen people get critically injured during an excited delirium state directly after being tased.
If an officer Tases someone, they are pissed and scared. It's like stopping someone after a 15-minute high-speed chase. It won't stop when you're on the ground. Officers tend to continue to spin the wheel of force after Tasing someone.
During an excited delirium state, I need complete access to my patient. I need to be monitoring them constantly, and I need to get as much info as possible so that they don't crash at the hospital from an O/D that nobody knew about. However, I also need my ambulance to be as safe as possible, and there is no way I'm going to put myself at risk. So, we have an officer come with us; whenever possible, NOT the one who shot the patient.
Now here's where it gets interesting. Officers love to put patients prone (face-down) on our stretchers. And then love to do choke-holds when the patient gets aggressive (or, again, Excited Delirium). I don't know if you've ever tried it, but it's REALLY DAMN HARD to breathe when you're on your stomach, and you're scared, and angry, and there's a 200lb cop standing on your neck.
I always always 100% of the time INSIST that my patients are supine (face-up) on the stretcher. I know of a hundred ways of restraining patients to my stretcher without causing further injury. I print ECG tracings and SpO2 tracings for the entire ride, so I can prove if necessary in a court of law that at no time was my patient's cardiac function or oxygen intake threatened.
The point I'm trying to make is that Tasers themselves do tend to be pretty humane, if you compare it to being shot or having your kneecap busted with a baton. There is incredibly poor education of cops as to what to do AFTER they've Tased, and there are few of us medics who care. Excited Delirium is real, and it must be managed with attention, care, and constant support of respiratory effort.
So, in summation, people don't die from being Tased. They don't die from Excited Delirium. (That is horseshit, by the way; it's like saying that people die from being depressed; people die from hurting themselves when they're depressed.) People die when there isn't an understanding between the cops and the Medics and the doctors and the nur
Here's another opinion you won't care for: Taser's lawsuits are obstruction of justice and Taser's corporate officers should be looking at jail time. Medical examiners believe Tasers can and do kill people. The best way to prove it is to look at police reports for statistics. Other forms of restraint should be just as deadly if hysteria is responsible for death. Alternate theories of heart failure due to electro shock look more promising than hysteria to me but thanks to the current judgement facts and statistics might not be available. That is a crime.
since when does a judge have a medical degree? I guess that means people that have no training or expertise in the area can know more than the poeple that do. I also think Taser's are lethal weapons, plain and simple, I'd like to see the CEO take a full charge from one, without him knowing it's going to happen, when he is laying there dead as a doornail, then I bet the judge and others will change their story.
Nice.. so peace officers are now equivalent to mindless, monolithic slabs of steel and concrete? Highway dividers do not think, they just obey the laws of physics, and react according to their design and construction.
Police officers, on the other hand, are thinking human beings capable of making a variety of decisions, all of which can change the outcome of encounters with "unruly individuals."
But it seems that North American cops are somehow incapable of basic self-defense, unless it involves hardware with a button or a handle on it. In many other parts of the world, "unruly individuals" are subdued using basic grappling and/or martial art skills. Something American police departments seem to have little interest in.
Check out this cop trying to arrest an unruly individual, drunk or on drugs. This officer obviously has no idea how to take control of a suspect, drunk or sober.
This cop can't even control a 90lb 15-year old girl! Then he pepper-sprays her just to show who the boss is. Unbelievable!
Compare and contrast with some of the many grappling techniques available for police officers to learn.
When properly trained in subduing unruly individuals, police officers can change the nature of the confrontation, into a situation they control. The cops in the two sample vids exhibit all the traits of loss of control of the situation: pleading, bullying, ineffective physical control, fear of becoming a victim, and reacting to that with weapons to regain control of what in other hands would be easily controlled individuals. Both lost the element of surprise when they physically engaged the subjects without an apparent goal or outcome in mind, and they both appear to lack basic takedown skills.
But hey, if they can make their jobs easier at the push of a button, why not? That's the American way!
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
There is some validity in principle to the "excited delirium" cause of death. Some people may actually become so agitated by being tased indiscriminately that their bodies shut down in heart attack, etc.
That is, use of the taser caused the agitated delirium, and therefore, the death.
To get a few things out of the way, YES! being tazered is generally better than being shot. YES! sometimes force is necessary.
The first big problem here is a company with a vested interest abusing the courts to override the official objective opinion of a medical examiner.
If Taser International is concerned that M.E.s don't know enough about Tasers, they should send them a compilation of their medical data. The M.E.s will then consider the source, and consider the data. I seriously doubt that M.E.s have a vendetta against the taser at this point.
Second, a jolt to the heart while at rest or a bit nervous is not the same as a jolt to the heart when extremely agitated with massive amounts of adrenaline in the system. Further, a single jolt can be uite different in effect than multiple jolts in a short time.
Given that some percentage of the population have some sort of undiagnosed electrical heart disorder that may or may not ever trigger a problem, it's hardly surprising if the taser (a device that disrupts biological electrical activity by design) carries a non-zero risk of death. It would be somewhat astonishing if it didn't carry a risk.
None of that means that the taser has no place in law enforcement, after all, physically wrestling people to the ground and pinning them carries a non-zero risk as well. But ignoring a non-zero risk can only encourage excessive use and causee needless deaths.
Distorting the collection of scientific data by applying legal arguments to scientific reports is simply not acceptable. Were I the coroner, I would demand that my name be removed from the report on the grounds that it no longer reflects my considered scientific opinion. Let the judge sign it if he's so sure.
"Local News has learned that the widow of the dead lineman will not receive any pension or insurance benefits, as the excited delirium, which was determined to be the official cause of death, was ruled to be a pre-existing condition and therefor the death was not job-related."
"Local News will attempt to contact the dead linemans' widow and her 4 children for reaction and quotes at the homeless shelter next week. Now for the weather..."
I started out writing this to be funny, but the more I read it, the more plausible it seems...
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
As someone with a congenital heart defect and damage to the Sinoatrial node http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinus_node of my heart, this scares the piss out of me. Letting a company use the courts to legislate that their product doesn't cause or contribute to the death of people it's used on turns logic on its head. The last thing I want is some idiot with a taser to zap me with it just because I won't bow to his demands.
This should scare you, too. There are about 90 million people http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/heart.htm in the U.S. alone who have a diagnosed heart conditions that range from mild to severe. Add to that people who have not been diagnosed, yet have a heart problem, one-third to one-half the U.S. population could be susceptible to cardiac arrest if they are tased.
I hope the doctors and scientists find iron-clad evidence so that this issue can be put to bed and tasers will be considered the lethal weapons they are.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
The short answer is that there doesn't have to BE an "offence" in order for you to be placed under arrest. There's no requirement for the police to give you a reason for your arrest, and they generally don't even have to charge you as long as they release you within 24 hours.
That is why you should NEVER resist arrest, regardless of your guilt or innocence. If you are truly being arrested for no reason, the worst that happens is you spend a night in jail, and then have a damn good case for suing the police. On the other hand, if you resist arrest, not only are you throwing away any possibility of winning such a lawsuit, but you are giving them the right to use force to subdue you, AND you're giving them an offence to charge you with.
In quite a few cases it has been shown to be the *first* thing the officer does when encountering resistance. If you're equating tasering someone with shooting them, I sincerely do hope shooting people have never been the first reaction to resistance where you live.
Yeah, what happens is that cops get the shit kicked out of them, or, have to hang back and wait for backup, when you have, trailer park dudes drunk and waving a knife.
Tasers should be outlawed; they do not do anything you couldn't do before with a gun or a truncheon
Tasers should not be outlawed and I might actually buy one myself. If someone is tazered, 99 times out of 100, they get up and walk away. If someone is shot, at best, you are looking at a visit to the ER, weeks, if not months of healing. There is no comparison. So, before Taser, all you had was the option to either shoot the suspect, or risk your own life. Taser gives police the option to quickly disarm a potential suspect and get him behind bars, without harm to police. I think that's worthwhile.
This is my sig.
Tazer is a For Profit company their role is to market
Yeah, and the people who oppose Taser are a bunch of for profit lawyers.... so, how does the profitability of taser mean anything?
This is my sig.
When you understand what the true motive of an entity is you can better understand their actions in the future. It should come as no surprise that they would try to support studies that would favor their product and the continued use of it. That is a corruption of the system.
yes, and that if it does happen, you're missing a frickin' eye!
It's crappy that it boils down to lawsuits, but I think you're going to have a much better chance of convincing a judge and jury that the force used was unjustified if you're mssing an eye, or walk into the court room wearing a plaster cast ("see that? that's trauma!" - Dr. Nick Riviera), than if you walk in, and all you have to present is your testimony that it "really, really hurt".
The lack of physical damage is a great barrier to convincing people that there even was damage and that you're not just whining when you 'got what you damned-well deserved'. Maybe all jurors on such cases should be tasered before they start deliberating.
FGD 135
http://www.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?a=340836&z=2 ST. PAUL -- Authorities are investigating the death of a suicidal 21-year-old man who died after St. Paul police shocked him with a Taser. Police say they responded to a call of a suicide in progress involving a controlled substance just after 2:30 a.m. Sunday. Police say the two arriving officers were confronted by a partially clothed man. As they tried to calm and control him for the paramedics, the man attacked both officers. Police say a chemical irritant spray had no effect on the man, and a third officer shocked the man with a Taser after he bit the other two officers. The man kept fighting, but officers were able to restrain him. He then became unresponsive. Paramedics were unable to revive him and he died at the scene. Both officers were treated at Regions Hospital and released.
so, do you agree that that's a 110% screwed up situation? Because if you don't, you probably shouldn't be allowed to interract with other people without supervision.
Liberty counts for nothing if people are expected to allow it to be arbitrarilly taken, and then hope for recourse later. Being able to later sucessfully sue for monetary compensation because your freedom was taken away is not, in any sense, the same thing as having had the freedom in the first place.
FGD 135
Ack! Google tells me nothing. I can tell you that I heard the story I believe on CBC radio, and I know the CBC did a big in-depth on tasing and Taser International, but alas I cannot find a link.
Mea Culpa.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
It seems to me, the COD on the Death Cert. should coincide with the International Classification of Diseases 9-Clinical Modification(ICD 9-CM) codes. These codes are not so controversial, as the E-Code section(External Injuries) has codes for Legal Intervention(E970-E978), and the only code(s) which may apply are E976-Injury due to legal intervention by unspecified means, and E977-Latent effects of injuries due to legal intervention.... ...Unless there is an update to the ICD 9-CM which applies.
Don't you think...? Or don't you?
Hey, that's exactly what I was thinking!
Dude, how stupid _are_ you? Even the police statement said they tased him because he went limp when they were escorting him out, _not_ your made-up "Yes, he attempted to walk away when the police questioned him"
Capisce? Even the cops _didn't_ say that he was walking away. If you're that fond of shouting "lies", heh, then maybe you should stop lying that much.
I don't know what little crusade you're on, little cretin, but you're starting to amuse me.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
If I were the medical examiner I would be so tempted to tell the judge to go p*ss up a rope. Or I'd say, "OK, your honor, I don't provide legal opinions so please don't provide medical opinions." Then again, there's that whole contempt of court thing. ;)
They can obtain weapons in special cases, but an officer on normal duty will not carry a firearm.
I lost my sig.
You might not want to be such a dick.
Nothing you said in your post disagrees with him, you're just not good enough at reading to realize you misunderstood his post.
This is the Bush administration's take on waterboarding too.
Exactly...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Snarky, but useless.
I've seen the video (so save the stupid quotes that you hand pick to support your position, they're useless too) and the incident did not occur the way you claim.
You are lying about the event.
I would also love to see that.
When you understand what the true motive of an entity is you can better understand their actions in the future. It should come as no surprise that they would try to support studies that would favor their product and the continued use of it. That is a corruption of the system.
So does this mean that we can disregard global warming because the people that advocate addressing it are linked to left wing causes?
I mean, advertising can only do so much, and at some point, the product ultimately has to sell itself. Taser sells itself. They come out, show a guy getting tasered, giving the cops a few seconds to restrain him without harm to themselves and even to the victim. On the other hand, if you shoot someone, a lot of times, they die. That's a pretty big difference.
This is my sig.
Please ask your officers to refrain from assaulting peaceful and compliant citizens. I am getting too old to heal properly from each and every "contact" I have with your hooligans. The finger your steroid-addled psycho broke last year hurts less some days, but the pain is unremitting. I do not hold anyone, particularly myself, above the law. Who do you think you are? A Coward, that we know. Your post also indicates you supervise policemen? You, Sirra, are the one I HOLD RESPONSIBLE. Is your cowardice typical of your kind? How about your moralizing? Bullies do tend toward moral weakness.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
I'm not talking about what people think the situation is as being a deciding factor, I'm talking about what the situation ACTUALLY is.
You say that caps aren't judge and executioner, but you support the idea of any officer being able to issue a 1-day prison sentence on a whim, and requiring whoever they issue it to to be entirely passive about the whole affair if they want it overturned.
The only slightly fair situation is to look at it after the fact, and judge everyone's actions according to the facts of the situation, rather than nebulous ideas about what people thought the situation was at the time - if you're absolutely certain that the reason you're being arrested for (and yes, officers should be required to give a reason for an arrest at the time) is invalid then you should be able to resist all you like, and when it's actually established that the cops were in the wrong, they can suck it up. If you establish that they didn't do what they were arrested for, but pin something else on them instead, they would still be entitled to have resisted the original arrest because it was false.
If you're not certain, you come along quietly and sue later. But requiring people who are in the right and know it to come along anyway, with stiff peanlties if they don't is just wrong.
If you want your 'everyone must come quietly' system, I propose that officers are properly and personally held liable for each and every incorrect arrest that they make - jail time and compensating the arrestee - if you want absolute power, you accept absolute responsibility.
FGD 135
Does this mean I can just tazer someone to death and it's not a murder? After all, they weren't killed by a tazer, they died of excited delirium. Surely I couldn't help that!
This is one of those cases where the government should assert its prerogative and tell Taser International to go piss up a rope.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
I'm not going to get into a debate on the off topic of global warming but you did hit the nail on the head. When a discussion on a scientific data is taken out of context because it supports some other groups agenda they will take it to the most illogical conclusions. You have to be careful where you get your support from. You would be well warned if you started looking for VC funding for a start up or to grow a business, sure they are supporting it and want to see you do well but be careful on the amount of control you give them, otherwise you will not be in charge. The product sells itself in a controlled environment. Taser brings their product out and 'tasers' a few people that should be in fairly good shape. Disregarding the stereotypes of fat donut eating cops, the average police officer is relatively fit compared to the population at hand. Taser does not bring out people who potential may die from a hit with a taser. People who may have a heart arrhythmia, palpitations, or some other nervous tissue damage. I don't fault the Taser product. I fault the company and its practices of aggressive growth and I fault the few police departments and their employees who disregard public safety over their own. If fire fighters were more like some police officers they would wait for the building to burn down to look for survivors.
If fire fighters were more like some police officers they would wait for the building to burn down to look for survivors.
The job of police is not to prevent crime or to rescue people as much as it is to contain it. Cops aren't there to keep one guy from getting murdered. They are there to try and keep a lot of people from getting murdered or to try and prevent civil unrest. In this, they do very well.
But people have this image of police as rescuers, and they simply aren't. Courts have held time and time again that police officers are not required to risk their lives to prevent someone else from getting killed. That's why you see, for example, situations like Columbine, where the cops surround the building - they contain the situation...
If you want to defend yourself and your property, that's your responsibility, not police.
This is my sig.
I'll remember that the next time the police attempt to force an entry without a warrant, or haven't met their traffic violation quota for the month. I mean why train a police officer if first Aid and CPR then? What purpose does that serve? I think the police over the years have designed a nice little niche for themselves that absolves them of any responsibility for their actions and the ability to wield exacting and selective enforcement of enough complicated laws that they can justify ensnaring any individual in. If we strictly define the police officer's role to containment and enforcement then we could say the same thing about the fire department. Their mission is to contain a fire and keep it from spreading. They don't have to enter a building to save anyone that may or may not be alive. Leave that to the paramedics, right?
So if I'm a tourist, then I'm basically screwed ?
Or, if the arresting office feels like it, you are subject to extra-judicial punishment at whim, whether you resist or not. You should know there is never any possibility of suing the police. That comment makes it seem like you're really pretty out of touch with every day reality.
But that's right, you're not an American.
Here, the cop will split your skull with his mag-light, stuff your head through a plaster wall so there's something to explain the wound, and then testify that he never removed the flashlight from the car. Anyone who testifies against the cop's word is "not credible", regardless of who they are. Keep pressing and you'll find your house broken into, drugs planted in your car, etc. etc.
You'd be wrong.
And so rather than clarify, you jump to conclusions and begin attacking him. You're a dick, I was right.
No, it's exactly what he said, you just assumed you knew what he meant. And were wrong.