Long Bow

The police need more training. The lady with knife, shoot it out of her hand and when she tries to drive away, shoot the tires out as well. Come on people this has been covered in the movies, the police need to catch up.

I have very little information on tasers and so I cant comment on them really. I also agree that some officers make poor decisions in how they treat people, giving them a taser is just another tool to carry out these poor decisions.

With that being said I think the statistics of 245 deaths over 2001 to 2007 is misleading. How many people were tased during this time, 246 or 24,500? Of the people tased, if the option of tasing was not available how many would have been fataly shot? If given the choice between risking my life against a taser or a bullet I would choose the taser. Again I'm not condoning the use of tasers as way to get some one to comply but if a situation elevates to the grey area where force is needed but not necessarily leathal it is an option. Not the only option but an option none the less.

__________________

Atomic Dog

I don't mind when cops tase bad guys. In the case of the 300 lb man clinging to his vehicle...if he's acting erratic and aggressive...zap him. In the case of the old russian man in a Canadian International Airport, unarmed, confused and surrounded by 5 cops...don't tase him to death (because that's what happened)...they could have easily restrained him physically.

Sorry for being vague...I really haven't had enough coffee this morning. But to clarify my position...I don't think the taser should be the be-all/end-all tool to "compliance." The truth is, if one innocent person dies as a result of this "non-lethal" device, that's one too many. Police officers need to be trained on when and how to use this device rather than go all John Wayne with it like we're seeing.

__________________

Tarenth

For the first part you are getting private security and police service confused again. Private security is given far more leeway in what can be deemed 'force' than police.

As for the number 245? In the other thread someone posted an article with around 22 for recent incidents of death. By that statistical sample roughly 85% of those deaths were related to complications from drug overdose (person high on Meth died due to being high on meth), 10% were from previously heart conditions, and 5% were under investigation.

Personally I'm a vindictive person who can't stand abject stupidity as an excuse for your actions. If people are informed enough to have a stance on the issue, then people are also informed enough to act appropriately when faced with that issue themselves. The exception to the rule would be when your mental facilities have taken leave and you no longer act within reason (intoxication, mental illness, altered mental status). At that point you have to stop and rethink when the 'right action' is because the arguement 'they should've just' doesn't play through when you can no longer accurately predict what the other person will do.

Example:
Old man has an altered mental status and is acting in a non-compliant and erradic manner.
If we could assume rational thought then the use of the taser is unneccessary because being confronted by a superior force would ensure compliance.
However the very nature of the situation throws out rational thought because he is acting erratic with an altered mental status. Therefore the rational arguement of "If security did X then the man would do Y" falls flat because it is replaced with "If security did X then the man would do something unpredictable". You then have to judge which part is more dangerous to the security officer(s), the public, the environment, and lastly the perpetrator themselves. Therefore a circumstance where "If security wrestles the man down, then he will fight back and injure himself and others" becomes true due to his unpredictability. If that is taken as an option then the option of immobilizing the man with a taser before subdueing him physically seems like the right option because it places a minimal amount of risk to all parties involved.

Now people who are in complete control of their mental facilties ("Don't tase me bro" and "I'm going to ignore the traffic cop because I think I'm right" cases) deserve to be tased due to their very actions. They are still rational and choose to not comply with lesser levels of force. Its like asking the same question 100 times in a row. Depending on the question, you'll probably get the same answer the 100th time as you would the 1st time so asking the next 99 times is going to get you no where fast. To those people I point, laugh, and know that as a rational person I would never act in such a manner and thus would never be treated as such. They are exceptions to logical reason and they fall under the 'extreme stupidity' catagory as well.

__________________
My sanity is not in question...
It was a confirmed casualty some time ago.

Ferris Bueller

Dont want to skew the topic, but you asked so I'll answer. If terrorists killed 245 people in 6 years, not only would they be the most ineffective terrorists in history, but they would likely be front page news for about a week, if that. Look at the school shooting at NIU. Look how quickly that has faded from memory and they're not even done with the investigation yet!
A taser. If they dont stop, use the gun. Taser doesnt take long to deploy, and if by some chance it's ineffective, you can always dodge the knife (anyone who cant figure out how to dodge someone charging at you from 10 feet with a knife needs help) and then pull your sidearm.

__________________
|TG-6th|Ferris Bueller

El_Gringo_Grande

First, there is a very large outcry for the banning of guns. Guns would be gone if not for the constitutional protection. And we have all kinds of "safeguards" to limit what we can and cannot buy to protect us from bombs.

On my second question I wasn't clear buy I was asking a cop. I seem to remember somebody pointing out that they would NOT use a taser on somebody with a deadly weapon. They would use a firearm.

Of course the local government would probably set the guidelines. But if my impression is correct and they deemed this person a danger to others they may have used a firearm instead of a taser anyway.

__________________
Sen. John McCain (AZ) For President '08
---
I’m not racists, I have republican friends. Radio show host.
- "The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
- "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - Emerson
- "People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta
- If software were as unreliable as economic theory, there wouldn't be a plane made of anything other than paper that could get off the ground. Jim Fawcette

mentholated

Did the officer use mace first? What about netting? Or those microwave thermal heaters that they use for crowd control? What about one of those laser blinding tools? Well, I guess they're too poor and need more of our tax dollars in order for them to not kill people.

No, if this means anything to me, its that police should be equipped with very small cameras on all of their weapons to record every single event they're used in. We might as well monitor the police's brainwave patterns somehow to see if they were acting in spite.

DudeMan

I hope this was largely sarcasm.... you ever tried to shoot a small object out of a limb... which will itsself be most likely moving.... a bit far fetched really...

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

Ferris Bueller

Of course it was sarcasm, note the part where he mentioned that they do it in movies so the cops should catch up.

And as far as those "safeguards" go, I can pretty much guarantee you that I could go buy everything I need to construct a bomb big enough to take out a city block or two from a farm supply store, radio shack and a couple other stops around town. No red flags would go up, especially if I paid in cash. Bombs are simple devices and can be made with any number of things which are available in mass quantities to the public. Theres no safeguard against that. Of course, I'd never be caught dead building a bomb like that, so its a non issue. But people really could and theres nothing that can realistically be done about it.

And guns would still be around even if there was no constitutional protection. You have to remember the basic laws of personal property, as well as business. The makers of guns are not going to just shut down without a fight. In addition, all the people that own guns are not just going to give them up because a group of people think they should. It'd turn ugly real quick.

But enough of the off topic chatter.

As far as the "weapon" involved, if the person is 25 feet away and holding a kitchen knife, a taser will suffice. Anything larger/deadlier or closer, yeah, the gun is probably the first choice.

__________________
|TG-6th|Ferris Bueller

TurkishDelight

People honestly don't know how close 25 feet is. Ferris is right anything closer or even farther away IMO, and someone is getting a gun pointed in their direction. Someone who is pissed off can close in from 21 feet in less than 2 seconds easy. Drawing from a holster will take you at the least, 1.5 seconds under stress, with a high retention holster. See my point? Cops are correct in thinking that BG+Knife+Aggresion=Glock being drawn from holster.

Bottom line is that tasers are a SAFE, effective, law enforcement tool.

__________________
|TG-Irr|Turkish

Atomic Dog

Tell that to the mourning families of the innocent people who have died as a result of the taser. Bottom line is that tasers are a less lethal option to the gun. They're not non-lethal and shouldn't be treated as such.

__________________

SmokingTarpan

That could go the other way, too: tell it to the mourning families of the innocent people that died when the police wrestled them/restrained them physically.

When it comes down to it, nothing is non-lethal. Even pepper spray could set off a chain reaction that leads to someone's death. The best option is to choose the response that is the safest for the bystanders, police and suspect that also responds with the appropriate amount of force to decisively end the engagement. Compared to some of the alternatives (i.e. physical confrontation or shooting), I think tasers are a good option.

Now, do the police need more training on deciding the appropriate response and when to use it? That's debatable. Remember media sensationalism: we'll hear about some officer tasing a grandmother crossing the street for weeks, but when was the last time you read about police tasering some dude with a knife chasing his neighbor?

__________________

[squadl]
"I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo

Long Bow

Yes of course I was being sarcastic! Thanks Ferris

Tarenth after reading your post I'm a little confused. You make some good points but after reading through it I find that you have left no reason to not use a taser.

The person is not mentally fit and/or unpredictable = Taze them

The person is mentally fit and predictable but non-compliant = Taze them

Is there any situation where a taser is not the choice? "Uhm I asked for a black coffee, zzzzzzaaap, don't let it happen again"

(Sarcasim alert)

__________________

Rincewind

Haha, that's meaningless Ferris, and I'm surprised it's you saying it. A lot more people drink water than are tazed. Out of the population of folks who drink water, and the folks who get tazed I bet I can tell you which one has the higher mortality... Rates, not numbers my friend. Of course, I haven't read ahead to see if someone else caught this...

__________________
~~ Veritas simplex oratio est ~~
No matter how far a wizard goes, he will always come back for his hat. --T. Pratchett

<---- You know you're getting old when you rely on your forum meta-data to remind you how old you are.

Required Reading for all TG sandboxers

Long Bow

Wow that is so obvious it hurts and yet I totally missed that. Stats really can make any point you want if put in the right context or contrast (or have an audience that doesn't see the obvious holes).

I think stats aside its more a matter of making the right choice in the situation. Officers need the proper training and proper equipment to be able to make those decisions.

__________________

TurkishDelight

The chances of you actually being tased, then getting killed by it are very, very slim, period.

Stop trying to make the Taser look like it has a 10% mortality rate or something.

__________________
|TG-Irr|Turkish