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.
Originally posted by Badge01
Hah, while riding I came up with a great, even humorous solution.
What we need is a robotic ride-along lawyer, sorta like the popup guy in Men In Black, or the robot taxi-driver in Total Recall.
[edit on 24-11-2007 by Badge01]
Originally posted by Zeta115
Well now I speak from experience when I say that I have
3 years law enforcement experience and I'll try to explain
my viewpoint of this incident.
"explains why the guy deserves to be electrocuted
Originally posted by Parabol
You're right, they should assume everybody they meet has a preexisting condition. They also shouldn't tackle people because they could have injured their knee playing football senior year. I could go on...
Well then you can call a lot of stuff lethal. Rocks are lethal, stairs are lethal, anything that can cause death is lethal. Tazers are a less than lethal force because the large majority of the time they don't kill people. You only hear about the events where someone is harmed, not the hundreds of other times that a fight, shoot-out, or some other crime is averted.
He could have been cold, I agree. And I agree that you wouldn't have seen it threatening, but you aren't a police officer. You haven't seen people reach into their pockets to grab a weapon or had a fellow officer attacked when someone reached into their pockets. It's all about perspective, you have to view it from the police officers point of view.
People, please stop thinking the cop would have shot him if he didn't have the tazer. And if you truly believe that then the tazer saved the driver from being shot. Without the tazer the police officer would have had to physically restrain the driver. Now, if you thought someone might be reaching into their pocket for, let's say a knife, would you want to put yourself in a position to be easily stabbed, or would you rather use a device that allows you to subdue him from a distance?
It is about immobilizing the offender in order to avoid any conflict, it is prevention. Police officers are trained only to use their weapons when fired at, drawn upon, or other extreme conditions. It is an ultimate last resort. The tazers are a line of defense before that so that hopefully no one pulls out a lethal weapon.
That's right, cops are just going around tazering children and old people for no reason. I know there have been stories in the news about this, but again, you only hear about the few instances where this happens. How many times have you read a news story about someone with a weapon who was tazed, and as a result, averted a more violent confrontation. Or how about how many cops are killed in the line of duty when a tazer, a stun, not even a bullet, could have saved them. I say that you are manipulating the few statistics of an elderly person being tazed or the like.
What about the safety of the officer who swore to protect your communities and family? The person who wakes up everyday and sacrifices a part of their lives so that you don't have to worry about your personal safety? What about the cops who have been killed in the line of duty? Heaven forbid another person WATCHES someone get tazed. I understand emotional harm but you can not weigh that against the safety of police officers
Originally posted by proteus33
i wonder i wear wolverive work boots all the time they are supposed to protect you from eletrical shocks because it keeps you from being grounded i wonder if it would keep u from taser shocks hmmm!
Originally posted by SpaceBits
reply to post by Parabol
i can say definatly "yes" as i posted earlier i was arrested for possesion and had about 12 officers all pointing loaded guns at me and 2 others with me. yes i was scared and yes i was moving around a bit. want to know what was going on in my mind at the time?...
"I would have grabbed the guy and threw
him onto the hood of my cruiser and cuffed his ass before he walked
back toward the vehicle. His hand in his pockets were plenty enough
threat in my opinion to warrant the force."
" The cop's reaction was warranted as his safety was in
jeopardy whether the driver knew it or not."
"Wyatt Earp Syndrome". A friend of mine is a cop. He said that a lot of new guys on the force have this syndrome. Happens when a new guy gets a gun, badge, and power. The older cops are on the lookout for it, but sometimes, guys slip thru the system. Most cops grow out of it on their own. "
Originally posted by Zeta115
The driver's wrongdoing:
1) Rule #1, never ever argue with a cop. If you do, you're going to jail
or else you're gonna get the # kicked out of ya before you get there.
2) Be courteous to the officer EVEN if you think he is wrong as that
sort of stuff can be worked out later in court with a lawyer present.
3) He did not follow the commands of the officer. He DID have the right
not to sign the citation. But he DID NOT have the right to disobey his
verbal commands for movement no matter what he thought he didn't
do.
4) The guy was an asshole in my opinion and got what he deserved.
[edit on 23-11-2007 by Zeta115]
[edit on 23-11-2007 by Zeta115]
Originally posted by avingard
Originally posted by Zeta115
The driver's wrongdoing:
1) Rule #1, never ever argue with a cop. If you do, you're going to jail
or else you're gonna get the # kicked out of ya before you get there.
2) Be courteous to the officer EVEN if you think he is wrong as that
sort of stuff can be worked out later in court with a lawyer present.
3) He did not follow the commands of the officer. He DID have the right
not to sign the citation. But he DID NOT have the right to disobey his
verbal commands for movement no matter what he thought he didn't
do.
4) The guy was an asshole in my opinion and got what he deserved.
[edit on 23-11-2007 by Zeta115]
[edit on 23-11-2007 by Zeta115]
great analysis zeta but I disagree.
1) you have every right to disagree with a cop and even argue. Resisting arrest and threatening the officer aren't allowed. The driver did neither.
2) you don't have to be polite. I'd highly recommend it, and throw a few insults at someone who wasn't, but not being polite is no crime.
3) on an interview later, the driver said that he thought the officer asked him to get out of the car so that the driver could point out the speed limit sign that was right down the road. The driver did that and when he turned around the cop had drawn a weapon on him. The driver thought it was a gun, that's why he was walking back to his car. he though the cop was a psycho and was gonna shoot him.
4) asshole? yea I can see that. Deserving the taser? nope.
We have a contract with the police. We obey them according to the law because the uphold and follow the law. What happens when we break our end of the bargain? We get arrested. What happens when cops break the agreement? They get arrested...by other cops.
To what point are we required to tow the line if we feel the police aren't doing there job? A step farther, to what point are we obligated to obey the police when we feel that they are a direct threat to us? All of these incidents arise from that gray area.