Hey, I cant get on the site....it's one of them that requires registration

Can you post the entire readpage please

If everything went down as reported, I don't blame the officer for using the taser. But my question is, why two deaths in this same county by tasers? Have they modified the tasers in some way that make them lethal when they shouldn't be? Something to keep in mind also is that the report states the guy was acting "incoherently". If he was whacked out on crack or something, the taser jolt could have caused heart failure that would have not occurred in an un-over-stimulated body.

why two deaths in this same county by tasers?

good question, kinda makes you wonder huh

Something to keep in mind also is that the report states the guy was acting "incoherently". If he was whacked out on crack or something, the taser jolt could have caused heart failure that would have not occurred in an un-over-stimulated body.

That's his fault and his problem.......not the cops or the counties

I can see the family now trying to sue the county case thier son died due to a tazer, when in fact he died due to his actions and his drug addiction


[edit on 29/5/2005 by SportyMB]

Your always going to have the odd fatality from these things.
Someones going to whacked out on crack and it'll push their heart that bit too much, or be epileptic, or have a weak heart anyway, etc, etc.

What you have to do is look at the bigger picture, how many times out of all the times they are used are people killed? You only hear about when it goes wrong, not when it doesn't.

What do YOU (this is to anyone saying tasers are bad) suggest?? emm?
Maybe they should shoot them instead? Club them with a stick?

Maybe they should be unarmed and maybe the cops should be hurt or killed?

At the end of the day they are relatively non-lethal apart from a very few exceptions.

I'm fed up with yet MORE nammy pammy doo-gooders with they're uneducated, illinformed, worthless points of view with no real perspective on the whole subject.

Thanks for posting it.....this gave much more insight

I wish they would take those things (stun guns) off the streets. I would have much rather had him shot in the leg and lost his leg than lost his life.''

Maybe a cop or former police officer on ATS can clarify this. Im going off of what I read in a book on deadly force encounters....so I cant say it's true for sure.
Anways, It is my understanding that cops are trained to shoot to kill, not to wound or stop. I understand why it is this way.....even if you shoot them many times they may still be alive and still have the momentum and or strength to pull a trigger, stab, deliver a blow to the head or whatever else.
Incapacitate the target, shoot center mass.

Anyways I understand the lady lost her son and her understanding is very clouded right now but he had/has a much higher chance of dying if he is shot in the leg than if he is tazed.

Turns out that some of these "non-lethal" weapons turned out to be quite lethal. If you don't mind paraphrasing a well known Titor.

This man had all the symptoms of having consumed PCP or "wet." PCP often causes deaths by heart or lung failure without any help from taser guns, so this is no surprise.

Police officers don't shoot people in the legs. That's a myth.

Zip

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I'm fed up with yet MORE nammy pammy doo-gooders with they're uneducated, illinformed, worthless points of view with no real perspective on the whole subject.

That's ok, us uneducated nammy pammys will still try to look out for your rights and well-being. I think it's namby pamby and "their" worthless points of view, but we get your drift.

It's well known by police departments (or anyone trained in taser use) that subects under the influence of narcotics are a high risk with tasers. I don't think there was any option in this case, it sounds like it was used correctly and saved the officer from being harmed.

[/nambypambyness]

Hard to blame the officer if the story is correct, although only the survivors live to tell their side of the story. A lot of cops these days are "taser-happy" I think, so I'm taking the cops side of the story with a grain of salt, but will presume her to be innocent.

Even a punch in the face or chest can kill someone under the right circumstances.

[edit on 29-5-2005 by Hajduk]

There are basically two ways that I can imagine a taser killing somebody.

1. If you didn't stop zapping them. There should be a quick review of the training given to the officers, and if they don't already, Tasers shoudl have a device which records how much of a jolt they give the target.

2. If your heart is weak or adversely affected by drugs, getting pumped full of electricity might kill you- no shock there.

Tasers shoudl have a device which records how much of a jolt they give the target.

Sounds good. But even without actual jolt meters could just see how much juice is left in questionable cases???....seems like the tazer gun would be kept as evidence if involved in a death so there's no reason why it would read incorrect

[edit on 29/5/2005 by SportyMB]

Can't a TASER be set at several levels of jolt? If so, was this one set at maximum?

That's ok, us uneducated nammy pammys will still try to look out for your rights and well-being. I think it's namby pamby and "their" worthless points of view, but we get your drift.

It's well known by police departments (or anyone trained in taser use) that subects under the influence of narcotics are a high risk with tasers. I don't think there was any option in this case, it sounds like it was used correctly and saved the officer from being harmed.

[/nambypambyness]

I was talking about the doo-gooders that talk about not using tasers, people not owning guns, people not having sharp kitchen knives, not smacking children, etc etc..

As you seem to share the point of view that the officer was right to use the taser I don't understand why you had to criticise my comments or pick on my poor spelling?

I can just see this being another case that doo-gooders use against police being equipped with tasers. Here in England they are starting to equip some police with stun guns and I think this is a good thing, as they can't carry guns over here and all they have is pepper spray and an ASP.
However the usual moron brigade is criticising the use of them and 'highlighting' incidences such as this where the outcome has been that the person has been killed. What they fail to do is highlight the numerous occasions when no-one has been killed and it has actually saved the officers life and potentially the lives of members of the public.

Members of the public here are not allowed to carry any form of selfdefence weapon either, be it a taser, pepper spray, stick, etc. I wonder how many women's lives might have been saved if they were allowed to carry them?
Of course if you know where to go they are still relatively easy to get hold off, so anyone dangerous still has them. And if they can't get them they just carry around a knife, gun, axe, machete, hammer or whatever else they can get.
Slightly off subject but worth mentioning.

Anyway, I hope I pass your little spelling bee, (or whatever you call it) let me know how I scored, yeah? cheers...


EDIT - for grammer, probalby still loads of mistakes but I don't want to upset 'mythatsabigprobe'

[edit on 29-5-2005 by AgentSmith]

I am in support of Taser use, a non lethal method disabling a target at Range is much better then getting shot full of lead. Not to metion these days we seem to hear more about deaths caused by Tasers, then Taser use that does not cause deaths.

Btw, wouldn't pepper spray work better in some cases?

Depends on the situation. If somebody who is possibly hopped up on drugs is charging you, you need instant stopping power. If you've got a bonafide tough guy on your hands or if he's just too hopped up to care- he might still be able to grapple with you because pepper spray won't stop him in his tracks. The last thing you want is to have him tackle you while you're spraying him and maybe you end up getting that stuff in your face too. Now you're not in such great shape either and your opponent has the advantage of being on drugs.

At least this isn't some old lady. Next time the police taser a little old lady who could have been grabbed and handcuffed or just left alone I'm gonna have a stroke.

The last thing you want is to have him tackle you while you're spraying him and maybe you end up getting that stuff in your face

I second that. Ive been sprayed once in my life (for training), they friggen sprayed like 1/4 a can on my face and it took me out of my A-game for awhile. By far the worst pain Ive ever felt. People that have been shot say they'ed rather be shot then sprayed with the good stuff.

i think they need to fix the wattage on these stun guns thay are killing to many people.they need to be also used with the persons weight in mind also.some police may not be using them properly. i feel there just using them at full force.dont forget about those who might have a bad heart ,pace makers and other defects.guide lines are a need with this weapon.i dont see much difference using a weapon that does the same thing a bullet does.it just does not make a hole.

hmm it seems he was SUSPECTED of POSSIBLY being on drugs. where is the autopsy report? also we only have the officer's word that she was suposidly charged by the guy. that lends little to the truth of the matter. the cop may be telling the truth, an outright lie to cover her tracks, or may have even misinterpited a stumble from a loss of ballance as an attack. my first question is where was her backup? you get a call about some crzy guy roaing arround why only a single cop responding? it seems that the police or this officer CREATED a bad situation by haveing a lone cop trying to deal with someone who may have been drunk, stoned, "crazy" or possibly even suffering from a head wound.

was it the fact of haveing a taeser reason to feel secure enough about handleing the situation alone? a cop should NEVER be ALONE at night especialy when the suspect may be haveing some "problems".

taesers should be removed from the police forces, they ARE NOT NON LEATHAL. but cops are asured that they are and so they will tend to use them when other means might be better and safer but not as conveinant. if they are not removed than there hould be strict standards on how they can be used. if someone who may be on drugs ha a higher than normal chance of being killed for example then NO ONE SHOULD BE ALOWED TO USE A TAESER ON SUCH A SUSPECT.