It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Last Words to Sheriffs, "Don't Kill Me, Man, Don't Kill Me"

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Read my posts, Jam. I've told you why that's not a real possibility.

DW- Trust me, very few people want to fight have a few hits from the taser.

Wyrd- Why isn't anyone reading my posts? On average, more than 57,000 law enforcement officers are assaulted each year, resulting in some 17,000 injuries. I think that qualifies as 'hazardous', if not under fire. You seem to be giving them a bit of credit on one hand, and then making such assumptions as they are brutalizing the public. This si straight from the article:


Williams appeared to be attempting to free himself from the chair, surrounded by deputies.

One deputy wrapped his arm around Williams' head and chin. Others were holding his arms and legs as Deputy Michael Mustachio applied the Taser to his chest.

One deputy commands Williams to stop resisting.


Bold courtesy of myself. You make this man sound like a martyr for fighting back against being restrained. He was warned to stop resisting, he had a mess of deputies on him, and was attempting to free himself. What, does he have to be waving around an AK before the deputies do something about him?

The taser is also vastly demoralizing, wyrd. After a couple of hits, most people give up, and don't want any more. That's the idea. You subdue them and make them unwilling to resist arrest any further.

As I pointed out earlier, Most of those cases had justification for tazer usage. Hell, if MY six year old pulled a piece of glass on hisself, I'd worry less about justification for pulling a taser, and more about getting that # out of his hands.

What you are doing Wyrd is systematically attacking Taser use. Would you prefer police to wade in and subdue pregnant ladies and children with their old friend the blackjack? If there is one case of abuse (and it's hilarious, oddly enough, because the suspect would have already pissed himself) it's the urine case.

I agree, there are corrupt and unfit cops out there, and they should be dealt with. But when society screams 'ABUSE' at everything a cop does -justified or not- it sort of dampens my respect for them.In the case beign discussed as well as most of your other cases, I would have no problem with taser use. Officers are supposed to roll up, assesss the situation, and act. No time for hesitation, and definitely not enough tiem to waste six hours talking down six year olds who can't even grasp logic yet.

DE

EDIT: Fiddling with teh bold.

[edit on 5-5-2005 by DeusEx]




posted on May, 5 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I'm sure police officers have a dangerous job. After all, look at how dangerous it is for citizens these days. Doesn't it make sense that cops going after these criminals will sometimes be the victim? Police officers are not some holy figures that everyone bows to upon site. Realistically, you can't expect everyone to respect police officers even if they are breaking the law. As well, its unrealistic to believe that no police officers break the law or abuse their power. I, as well as, it seems, many people on this board, have had personal experiences of this abuse.

Deus, maybe things are different for you in Canada. After all, a police officer in Canada is not the same as a police officer in the US who is not the same as one in Mexico. Police are just humans, and as such, they are prone to break laws as much as anyone.

But, all in all, I revert to the fact that this was a sick man who was murdered in cold blood. The brutality of cops was not what this guy needed. This guy needed to be taken to a hospital.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   
muadibb


Second of all, you are assuming that everyone of those people that the police has used tasers on did not do anything to warrant being tasered.


I didn't assume that, I didn't say that, I wasn't thinking that. You're assuming I've assumed something.
Lots of people do lots of stupid things, and they pay for their stupidity in lots of ways. 50,000 volts is not the worst punishment for stupidity, not by a long shot. What I want to see is some universally accepted guidelines for the usage of Tasers. As it is, many cops can use Tasers just because a suspect is resisting verbally. I think putting someone at the risk of death because they're giving an officer lip is a bad idea.

The problem is, as I see it, many people continue to claim that these things don't kill people. That leads to people using them callously, as opposed to with the care one would expect of any other potentially deadly weapon. If a cop can Taser someone to get them to comply with orders, why can't parents? Because the cops have risen above the law, and we need to remedy that situation or learn to be slaves again.



i would agree that it is probably true that some police officers do use excessive force against some people, but what you are claiming is an exageration...it is as simple as that. I have seen people fight with police, as in struggling and physically attacking them claiming they are innocent, when in fact they are not.


What exagerated claim have I made? I was referencing the news, and showing instances of abuse of power. I was making suggestions to relieve the burden on police and renew trust in the system. I don't see any wild exagerations in my earlier posts, and I just checked to make sure. If you would be more specific, I'd appreciate it. As it is, you're saying I said something ridiculous, but you're not saying what I said. Follow me?

And as to your second point, sure, all the criminals say they're innocent. That doesn't mean they are. That's why we have courts. Agreed. However, there is a big difference between that situation and the ones we're talking about. Everybody claims they're innocent, that's a given, but it's not the job of the police to punish people, they're just the collectors. If the Taser has to be used to collect people, that's fine, if it's used abusively, that's not.



In any society there has to be laws and citizens should follow those laws....but we all know that many don't, some because they think they should be able to do anything they want, other's because they are in a powertrip themselves, know that they are guilty yet want to fight their arrest, or are under the influence of a drug or alcohol.


Absolutely. That's why Tasers can be a useful tool. They can save people who would otherwise be getting a stick to the head, or a bullet in extreme cases. That's what the Taser was created to do, like I said before, it's not a teaching aid.



You also have to admit that police officers are human beings too, and they have in many situations very little time to assest what they should do in a situation, so mistakes from time to time will happen. Does this mean we should get rid of police officers? You are out of your mind if you think so.


I've said so myself at least once during the course of this discussion, cops are just humans. And no, we shouldn't get rid of police officers. They serve a critical purpose in our society, and we need them around for a number of reasons. What we need is officers who aren't a liability to the society they get paid to protect. Well trained, well intentioned, respectful, professional officers of the peace, who will take to heart the motto that graces their car door; Protect & Serve.



Should we get rid of tasers? More people will get hurt a lot more if police officers have to use more physical force instead of tasers, or even their guns if the criminal becomes very aggressive trying to hurt or kill the police officer and can't be stopped without the use of lethal force.


No, as I said before, Tasers are a useful tool. What we need is to set some boundaries for the use of said tool, and strictly punish abuse. Better cops, better training, more awareness, no tolerance for abuse.

DE
I am reading your posts, rest assured. And in comparison to the number of police officers who are assaulted every year, about 3.9 million citizens are assaulted in 2033, according to the most recent summary from the DOJ. Just to put things in perspective.
www.ojp.usdoj.gov...

What I'm trying to point out is that the world is a dangerous place, and it can only be made less dangerous by a culture of mutual respect. Cops do a dangerous job, but it's less dangerous statisitically than working in a convenience store. Do you grant convenience store employees the right to Taser, beat, subdue, or abuse customers who are arrogant or combative, or are acting like they might possibly have a weapon? If a customer in a convenience store reaches into his pocket, does the clerk leap over the counter and put the guy in a choke hold?

Cops are no more entitled to be raging bulls than any other citizen. We're all just trying to survive, and the best way to do that, is to show each other some respect. As I've said before, most of the problem lies with citizens who don't show the cops any respect. However, they will never change unless the cops do. This situation is a bit like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, in that we're locked in a downward spiral of fear, mistrust, and violence.

I don't have any more solutions at the moment, but I think the earlier ones I made have some merit. They would hopefully reduce the instances of police brutality, and that in turn would hopefully reduce the instances of citizen agression.

Now, another part of the problem is the 'under siege' mentality that cops often have. They slip into an Us vs. Them mentality, and that is no way to conduct yourself around your fellow citizens. Most cops justify this mentality by citing assault and murder statistics, but as I pointed out earlier, statistically their job is less dangerous than being a store clerk. The mentality they are holding on to is not only hurting our society, it's making their job more difficult, because it fosters resentment, and heightens the possibility for a confrontation.

I think much can be done to change the minsets of both police and citizens, but it's going to require some honest evaluation by both parties. Maybe a solution is impossible, I don't know. Working towards a solution, however improbable, just seems like the right thing to do.

[edit on 5-5-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Sad sad sad......
After using the tazer FIVE times in one minute, what did they think would happen to the poor guy...Wasnt there a superior officer there to stop what was happening...If the guys handcuffed and restrained in the chair, he aint gonna harm anyone, not even himself..

Smells of South Africa in 1977...The police there did something similar to a journalist called Steven Biko..arrested and beaten to death in room 619.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   
The Politeness Factor

About 50% of people LEOs meet will be kindhearted, good folk who are either indifferent or friendly to them. here, the politeness factor definitely comes in play. An officer who doesn't look like he's loaded for bear, dealing with people who haven't seen the real-life effects of force on people will definitely have a nice old time, even if it's doling out tickets. Unfortunately, this mostly applies only to small, isolated incidents like traffic stops.

The "Oh, #s" Factor

Unfortunately, the other fifty percent of the population is actively hostile to officers. This is where the hulking, 250 lb officer loaded down with gear is at an advantage. Suspects seeing this person yelling and whatnot are much more likely not to resist in the first place, especially if they have been tasered or hit with an asp before. This definitely comes in handy in the more life-threatening situations, where suspects have no intent of submitting.

Now, which is more useful? The everyday stops will most likely be easier for a polite, kind officer, but the odd time where the suspect reeks of belligerence, I'd rather have the bear on my side. Unfortunately, cops can't afford to be polite all the time. Please and thank you won't get you far with a car thief. And no, you do not know if that person you're pulling over has just cocked his gun. You never know what's going to happen, so are you going to play it safe, or hope that you won't end up in a bodybag?

While statistics of violent crime are going down, I don't believe a word of it. There is a lot of unreported crime out there- not every homeboy is going to go to the bronze if someone hits him over the head with a bat and takes his weed.

So, we have a dichotomy of policing attitude- those who go in expectign a hostile populace, and those who act politely and sometimes end up losing control of a situation. Look at that video on the Welcome Home thread- two more steps, and that drunk driver would have gotten away.

DE



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Your division of the populace into polar opposites is a good look into the mind of a prospective law enforcement agent in Canada. That's about all it's good for.

Back to the topic of this thread though, this man was simply sick, he was an epileptic, obviously having a bad episode. What is epilepsy? It is a neurological disorder characterized by the malfunction of motor,sense, and mental skills. It was simply not within the ability of this man to control his functions.

Perhaps the police thought they could beat the disorder out of him?

I can't speak for the motive of these police officers, but as I said before, they shouldn't have been the ones to deal with him, especially applying a taser on him. By the time he got shocked the first time, he was probably having a seizure which caused him to get shocked more. This man should have been sedated in a hospital.

I don't understand how one can support the abuse of a sick man by police officers, but you have your own motives for this case I guess.

I, for one, will always speak out against injustice, whether it is against my "protector" or not.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   
So, if you're sick...this gives you the right to resist arrest? Is that your logic? So, the police should have sat around and restrained this man until a medic with a sedative arrived? How long would that have taken? How many people could have gotten hurt in that time? You have how many officers in this room dealing with this one guy, when they should be out doing their jobs?

Yeah, I love this. "Hey, let's bring a violent felon to a hospital full of sick and injured civillians! Brilliant idea!It's only taking four or five of us to restrain him!"

DE



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   
If the guy was in a restraining chair, then yes, wait for the sedative to arrive.

Your assessment of this man as a violent felon is inaccurate. Perhaps you need to do some more research on epilepsy.

Here's a link for you: Epilepsy

By the way, do you understand that murderers, thieves, etc. go to mental hospitals all the time? This guy obviously needed help and not brutality. Perhaps the next time my friend's schizophrenic dad goes on an episode, I'll advise him to beat the disorder out of his dad.

But, like I said, perhaps it is different in Canada.



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
DW- Trust me, very few people want to fight have a few hits from the taser.

Can you explain what you tried to say here?



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   
DW- I tried to say that very few people who have had a hit from a taser are willing to get up and continue fighting.

Jam, did you not read the apart where he was acting violently, assaulted his family and an officer, and was attemptign to escape the restraint?

Are the police simply to allow him to escape, just because he has epilepsy? I very much doubt he was in one continual seizure, or that his seizure HAPPENED to be in such a manner that it went for the restraint buckles.

DE



posted on May, 5 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Deus, did you read the link about epilepsy? Epilepsy defined by a neurological disorder where one has a malfunction of motor, sense, and mental skills. Get it?



According to police reports, Williams' family said he refused to take his epilepsy medication and was acting violent and irrational.


Sorry, but there is no one long seizure. If that's what you think was happening, maybe you need to read up on epilepsy. Did you read the part about him rocking back and forth in the police car? Obviously, he was having an episode. Plus, there was no indication he was going for the buckles, merely "that he was attempting to free himself." Plus, the guy had handcuffs on while in the restraint chair. This guy must have been Houdini if he was getting out of that one.

We can keep going on like this indefinitely. Because, I'm not going to let you stretch this story to suit your agenda or allow you to ignore the fact that this was a sick man.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Yeah, I know he was sick. I also know he was acting violently and irrationality. Is this supposed to excuse his actions somehow? Even if he was having an episode, officers still have a job to do. They had to restrain him. He was still attemptign to escape, which meant he could have hurt himself, or more likely, officers.

Epilepsy is a sickness, not an excuse.

DE



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Obviously he needed to be restrained, he was a danger to himself and others around him. But, he didn't need to be tazered 5 times in a minute, especially under his condition. This man, needed to be sedated and put into a room with padded walls, i.e. checked into a mental institution.

Tazering a man with epilepsy 5 times in a minute is just reckless. And, it seems, these officers had no intention of bringing him to a mental institution, merely throwing him in a jail cell. If he could have survived the brutality, who knows what this man might have done to himself in a jail cell.

[edit on 6-5-2005 by Jamuhn]



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   
I agree- he should not have ended up in a regular cell, under any circumstances. however, I do refute your claims of malice on the part of the officers. Recklessness? Perhaps. But if I saw a man still struggling against three officer and a chair after assaulting a number of people, I would assume this person to be more aggressive than the average felon.

AS for the mental hospital, we'll never know. I'm fairly sure that no matter what, if you are arrested you must be processed at the police holding facility.

DE



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
DW- I tried to say that very few people who have had a hit from a taser are willing to get up and continue fighting.

Any normal person who isnt restrained in a chair being shouted at then yes I agree, but when your restrained and supjected to pain and being shouted at then its a whole new ball game. Do I need to mention panic?



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Is panic an excuse now, too?

What it boils down to is he SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESISTING.

He resisted arrest. He resisted restraint. He continued resisting restraint, despite verbal commands and people physically stopping him. Most people don't seem to realize that handcuffs are temporary restraints- I could undo a pair of handcuffs with a pen. It's not hard.

DE



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Is panic an excuse now, too?

What it boils down to is he SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESISTING.


What it comes down to is HE WAS AN EPILEPTIC. Deus, read the links on epilepsy, because it seems you do not and are not willing to understand what epilepsy is. You know what the word is that we have for people unwilling to educate themselves, but I don't want to go there.



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
Is panic an excuse now, too?

Yes it is, its not an exscuse its an accepted medical condition.


What it boils down to is he SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESISTING.

If someone hurts you regardless of who they are do you go willingly or not?


He resisted arrest. He resisted restraint. He continued resisting restraint, despite verbal commands and people physically stopping him. Most people don't seem to realize that handcuffs are temporary restraints- I could undo a pair of handcuffs with a pen. It's not hard.

DE

We are not talking about handcuffs, we are talking about a chair.
If you are restrained and scared you will panic.
Do you blame a swimmer if he drowns his rescuer in a panic?



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Jam, I understand what epilepsy is. However, since the term epilepsy is very vague, he could ahve been having one kind of seizure or another. Let me break this down for you:

Even if you are not in control of yourself, and commit a criminal act, the police must still stop, restrain, and arrest you.

Seizure

I do not see a seizure in there that has a symptom of resisting arrest, assaulting officers, or attempting to escape restraint.

As for panic, yes I would blame the drowning victim. You would not get off a murder charge if you simply said 'I panicked.'

DE



posted on May, 6 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
As for panic, yes I would blame the drowning victim. You would not get off a murder charge if you simply said 'I panicked.'

Then you dont understand panic, I thought as a cop you would be trained to tell how "panicking" is quite true.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join