It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Man killed after grabbing officer\

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 09:50 AM

Originally posted by ybab hsur
reply to post by ZindoDoone

i see...and you know this because you were a police officer

or because you've watched a few episodes of COPS and CHIPS?

its funny - because i had been talkign to my friend on the phone, and now he's running off to get his official police handbook....he's so angry that people insinuate things that they have no reason to insinuate

i guess we'll have to wait and see what an official law book says on the issue of use of firearms.

Actualy BOTH, I don't know if you are a shooter, but I am an avid shooter. Twice a week I'm at the range. I'm one who can hit what I aim at. Unfortunatly most cops are not trained marksmen. Try running a few blocks then draw a weapon and hit a man sized target 'in the correct area' to wound. I'm willing to bet you can't. Wrestle with your friends for 5 minutes and do the same. I bet you can't do it. My point was very few can and it is unfortunate that shooting to protect your fellow officer happens. A WARNING SHOT IS RECKLESS. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THAT BULLIT IS GOING TO COME DOWN AND WHAT IT HITS.


posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:18 PM
i dont know i think its wrong to take a life from someone why couldnt he just shot him in the leg or somthing instead of just mortally shooting him

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:38 PM
reply to post by Ultimo

Read the p ost above yours. There is your answer.

Not a one liner

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by titorite

LOOK you do not seem to listen very well either , it says that he was struggling with the officers after he took the taser you seem to continue the fact that the taser needs to be reloaded to work THIS IS NOT THE CASE if he were to take the taser and touch the officer with it while he is struggling HE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO USE IT AGAINST THEM the X26 and MOST OTHER TASERS HAVE A TOUCH FUNCTION< SO IF A FOLLOW UP SHOCK NEEDS TO BE ADMISTERED YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RELOAD

I have sent you a U2U and said that several times on this thread, he was still placing the officers lives in danger and no there are not enough facts here for you to judge the situation.


I see what you are saying and that is awesome YES it is a VERY PLAUSIBLE ARGUMENT< BUT WE DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED, just say you hate cops and get it over with, you want the cops to be guilty....just say it.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by ZindoDoone

great post, in training we did that quite often and it is difficult to shoot when you are out of breath, a point that has not been made here till you,,,, great point

[edit on 9-6-2008 by birchtree]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:21 PM
All is One,

It's not voltage or amperage that kills it's wattage. If the wattage is significant enough and near something important like the heart it will kill. High amps means nothing without the voltage to get the amps past your epidermis. High voltage means nothing without any real current behind it like amps. But mix the two together and have enough voltage to deliver something like 3 milliamps to the heart and you've got a cardiac arrest. Tazers have more than enough voltage to get to the heart but not enough amps (generally) to stop the heart. the total wattage for most tasers is something like 30 watts. anybody who's been shocked by a lamp on accident has introduced more wattage to their body than a taser could.

However if the timing is just right ( current hits heart right in between the beat of the heart when the nerve triggering the pumping action is at rest) the small amperage of the tasers current can stop the heart, and does all the time) in in the case of the taser it is indeed the Voltage that kills, because without this voltage there would be no way for that current to get any where near enough to the heart to stop it.

Also if the person is sweaty and salty the current will get an boost and probably a slightly increased chance of death.

As for this guy, he was crazy for attacking a pair of police officers. Good for him for defeating the tasers punch but that would tell you something right there about the guys demeanor. I say anybody who can fight their way out of the tasers hold is straight loco and the taser was probably justified. However I do agree that more and more and by and large the taser is becoming a facist tool of human rights oppression.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:32 PM

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
It's not voltage or amperage that kills it's wattage.

I am an electrical engineer.

Volts x amps = watts

The reason a taser gun does not kill you is because it is high voltage, low amperage. Hence the reason why I said its the amps that kill, not the volts. I have absolutly know clue why you are trying to correct me.

Did you know I can kill you with a 9 volt battery?

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:58 PM
To all that are arguing over the possibility of the taser killing, the point is weather it was in a contact delivery or a fire delivery, if the individual would have subdued the officer or officers do you think they believed or the officer who saw what happened felt that they were in a fight for their lives

I would say that it was a reasonable argument that if the subject refused to comply and was fighting with two officers and had taken the taser from one of them that at that point he was attempting to subdue them, and if he did so what would he have done after that point---would he have then taken a handgun would he have stopped his agressive behavior and ran off or would he have continued.

I think they were in a fight for their lives, it was the suspects concious object and desire to resist and fight the officers in an attempt to subdue them.

You can argue what ifs all day long, was there another cartridge put in the taser, did he in fact grab that taser or the other officers taser that had not been shot yet, was it a duel function taser, could the taser be considered deadly..... the awnser to any and all of these is mr. titirite none of these questions are for sure awnsered, the fact being is did another officer feel those officers were in danger, he made the choice and officers have a career and criminal charges that they are facing every time they draw that weapon and send rounds down range. I am in good faith (at least in this particular incident) that the officer believed he was making the correct choice on the situation that he came upon and defended his fellow officers lives.

Were there other ways things could have been dealt with possibly, but we were not there....let me say that one more time. We were not there. As always we are debating what was written not what happened.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:20 PM
If you read my post you'd see that I am correct. voltage alone doesn't kill you, amps alone doesn't kill you. the combination in the right amounts will kill you. anything that has enough voltage to easily (and a taser gun can easily get to your heart) infiltrate your heart and deliver at the same time enough amps which isn't a lot will kill you. the taser has low amps, but the voltage is high enough to get it to your heart where under the right circumstances it can deliver enough amps to cause a cardiac arrest and and kill you.

And yes I am aware it's possible to kill somebody with a 9 volt battery. I wasn't born yesterday. It all depends on what you are doing with the said battery. Besides a lot of things can kill you electrically that use little batteries.

I guess we are really both saying the same thing in the end and are arguing two sides to the same coin. other than that I agree with everything you have to say. In the taser it's the voltage thats the dangerous factor. but it's still the amount of wattage (Voltage X Amps / Ohms) that the taser is delivering to the heart that can cause a cardiac arrest. Also, the muscle contractions of the body are pretty damed dangerous too.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by BASSPLYR]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:22 PM
id like to say a couple things here some people are not going to like and take as attacks but theres nothing i can do about that as i feel i must be honest

secondly im not saying that this is the exact situation here but its interesting whats taking place in this thread

birch your comments have all been constructive and helpful u seem to be a level headed police officer your knowledge has added to this thread

agent i mean no offense but from my standpoint u seem to have a grudge or something along those lines im sorry if thats not the proper word to describe your behavior but you seem angry and/or frustrated (im sorry if those are the wrong words), it seems like theres something else influencing your posts which is distracting you from the debate it seems to make you unopen to any ideas and thoughts, a close minded person in my opinion well, to me im sorry this will offend but it seems like you may not be the best candidate to be a officer of the law, your knowledge is flawed according to fellow police officers, you dont seem to have the exact true facts, you spoke earlier about hollywood but several of your statements actually reflect hollywood ideology rather then actually police knowledge, i dont say this to emblazen you i say this as hopefully constructive criticism which you will take in stride to better your career or possibly rethink careers

this brings me to what i find interesting in this thread

several people make great defenses for the police
especially what was said about shooting a target after being tired/wrestled with etc
i fully accept that as fact

however it was the initial 2 officers that would be out of breath am i not correct?

the 3rd shooting officer showed up on scene hopped out of his car and shot the guy dead? is that not the fact here?

all im saying is to everyones defense here theres a mutual defense against what is being said

the 3rd officer showed up

if the man had the taser and was not wrestling with the officers why did the 3rd officer take charge of the situation

if the man had the taser and the cops were wrestling with him
doesnt that make the situation more dangerous by shooting the guy? no one has still answered that question yet, we've spoken about hollywood well according to the previous defense regarding not being able to aim, well if the guys wrestling the cop and the cop cant aim? what prevents him from shooting the cop instead?

this brings me to my last point in my initial post i referred to cops as a gang
this thread actually shows a good example of how your average citizen can come to that statement

if a neutral person came on this thread today what would they see?

they would see citizens defending the situation of the man being killed, not exactly defending the man himself as he wasnt the ripest in the bunch but defending the instances regarding his death

on the other side you have officers of the law seemings to offer what in my opinion is a futile defense to make their side seem like they were doing things by the book

i dont mean you officers are a gang on here thats not my intention i just intend to show how that image can be conceived by a average citizen and why police work seems to not exactly be what it should be today (which also goes back to my initial post)

yea the statement i made about the west being fairer was dumb but that was when we were getting personal so we were both equally at fault with the dumb comments on that one

the fact is its not really whether the cops were right or wrong its about the fact we need new ways of going about things in order to ensure the safety of all

the united states is innocent until proven guilty and the police arent those who are in power to make that decision the police are there to provide unbiased protection. to serve and protect
its my opinion with the tense times we live in today we need other ways for 3 cops to handle 1 man

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:34 PM
Can't say anything about the third cops marksmanship but cops don't have the luxury of stress training where they get to practice shooting their gun accurately while under high stress situations. Almost nobody without this very specialized training has a good chance at being a good shot in real life under that kind of stress. an example- a cop faced off with a burglar on a 3x6 foot balcony in detroit. both shot at each other and both fully unloaded their clips at each other from a distance of 6 feet. all rounds from both sides missed completely. It happens.

So knowing this police are trained that if they are going to fire their firearm it's going to be take no chances shoot for the largest part of the human body there is type of shot. Ie spray and pray while aiming at the perps center of mass. Some shots will land, most will miss, but the perp should take a few that will incapacitate them.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:35 PM
last thing id like to say and this will more then likely be my last post on this subject as no new information is available and we all seem to be stuck in our beliefs

however ive seen people on every drug there is yea ive seen people bug out ive seen ppl go nuts
drugs can make you incredibly aggressive and violent and all these people refer to youtube posts about psycos going nuts and guys running on their leg stumps

yes all this stuff does happen once in a while but to assume everyone on pcp etc is that way is an ignorant statement based on no knowledge of drugs

besides i thought this was america and people had compassion for their fellow man
if thats the case then like i said shouldnt the govt and police force have a better way to deal with these pcp people with superpowers instead of shooting em dead?

if a guys got a gun then cops should shoot him all day long

if the guys got a damn pitch fork or tomato cage or pick axe or hose i think the cops should be able to come up with something different to handle the situation

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:38 PM
reply to post by BASSPLYR

than according to your and everyone elses statement
if the cops are wrestling with the guy which is stated in the article if im not mistaken, then the officer discharging his weapon has absolutely no control (this is according to what those of you are saying) and that if he has no control over his weapon then what prevents him from hitting the guy or the officer wrestling with the guy who is less then inches away from the man being shot

according to the statements made about marksmanship that alone proves the cop was escalating the situation and creating a more dangerous one by discharging his firearm

edited to also say a cops main job is to deal with high stress situations hes a cop for the reason if he isnt trained to deal with high stress situations then please how i am the only one who finds a problem with that

[edit on 9-6-2008 by Dramey]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:55 PM
reply to post by trs10

I grew up in the inner city, I know what it's like.
Trust me, cops now days are doing a lot more bad than good.
The problem is not the rules and laws, it's the individuals.
If you give someone power, they become corrupt, bottomline.
The cops where I grew up at took drugs from drug dealers and sold it to other drug dealers and did drugs themselves.
People who usually want to become cops are agressive "Look at me I'm a HERO" types, they care more about playing out some drama they saw on TV more than actually doing there job. Let me ask you something though, what give you the right to say who lives and who dies? Are you God? I think we should leave descisions like that up to the Big Guy.


[edit on 9-6-2008 by jimmyjackblack]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 04:17 PM
The third party scenario happens all the time. Its legit in my state anyway. Someone can happen along and use deadly force on somebody if they believe that another is in danger of serious bodily injury or death. This works for cops and civillians.

All police weapons from tazers to pepper spray or batons are designed primarily to incapacitate a resistant suspect to a degree that allows cops to take him into custody. Batons are considered deadly weapons anyway, and getting hit with pepper spray or a tazer would put ME in mortal fear because I would quickly be in no position to fight off anything, and left at the mercy of whoever shot it at me.

Why would we want to say that you have to wait for the guy to get one of the guns or almost kill one of them before they shot him? He already took a weapon from a cop. He already fought through the weapons effects and turned it on them. Its not like they walked up and shot him outright. They tried to subdue him with other options and failed. Should they have just left him alone after the taser failed?

As far as the third one walking up and shooting him, the argument that he had no right to fire is kind of like saying you couldnt shoot a dog attacking a little kid, just because the dog isn't directly attacking you. Defending someone else is a legit reason to use force. Cops have radios right? Cop #3 probably was well aware how bad that fight was going when got there.

The whole can the tazer kill you thing is kind of moot, because it will incapacitate you, therefore expect to get seriously screwed up when you cant move and get hit in the head with a garden tool.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 06:59 PM

You would be right, police officers have very little control of their firearms when they are firing them in high stress situations. technically now that there are bullets flying and that they are sorta aimed at the target does make the situation much more dangerous and the cop has now escalated the problem.

However I can't blame him for shooting at the guy. I would too. Almost nobody is trained for high stress firing situations not even most military folk. we're talking about SF level of room raiding split second target aquisition firing. Not even expert marksmen for contests have this type of stress training. put the worlds tournament gunslinger champ into a situation where somebody is trying to kill them with a gun and they won't fire too accurately either. they just don't get the saturation training under combat stress that is required to fire back calmly and with any degree of superb accuracy. and for the average person realistically most people couldn't hit what they are aiming at with a pistol from 10 feet away without a lot of time on the range, and even then that training won't help them for the time when somebody is shooting at them.

Not sure why a man stealing lawn ornaments requires being tasered, but the guy was hopped up enough on something to fight against 500,000volts surging through every cubic millimeter of his body. that requires some serious PCP, he probably deserved the taser in this instance. however I still believe that the taser and stun gun are tools of facisim and oppression by and large. oh yeah also implements of torture and a favorite tool for serial killers and rapists.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 07:11 PM
I did a quick search and found a different article which is pretty similar to the first one but one major difference stands out and raises more questions. It's from the local newspaper the first I believe was a local TV station.

When the officer shot the man with a Taser, the suspect dropped the stands and removed the Taser's wires from his body. When officers tried to arrest the man, he fought back, grabbed an officer's Taser and tried to use it on police.

“The suspect shocked both officers at different times during the fight,” said Phoenix police spokeswoman Stacie Derge.

Now it wasn't reported in the first report that the perp actually tazered the cops. If thats the case then that shuts the door on any possibility of abusive force. But why wasn't it reported the first time? Wouldn't that be a major aspect of the story? The first report says the cops received minor scrapes and bruises, no shocks. The local news isn't making a fuss about it here so I it seems more unlikely abuse had took place.

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 08:02 PM

Originally posted by Dramey
last thing id like to say and this will more then likely be my last post on this subject as no new information is available and we all seem to be stuck in our beliefs

however ive seen people on every drug there is yea ive seen people bug out ive seen ppl go nuts
drugs can make you incredibly aggressive and violent and all these people refer to youtube posts about psycos going nuts and guys running on their leg stumps

yes all this stuff does happen once in a while but to assume everyone on pcp etc is that way is an ignorant statement based on no knowledge of drugs

besides i thought this was america and people had compassion for their fellow man
if thats the case then like i said shouldnt the govt and police force have a better way to deal with these pcp people with superpowers instead of shooting em dead?

if a guys got a gun then cops should shoot him all day long

if the guys got a damn pitch fork or tomato cage or pick axe or hose i think the cops should be able to come up with something different to handle the situation

Ok let's take your scenario about people on pcp with superpowers and the cops should deal with that instead of shooting them.

When someone feels no pain and is king kong strong, all you can do is shoot them.

And pitchfork and pickaxe? I dare you to stand there with a gun in your hand while someone comes at you with something they could easily kill you with and not shoot them.

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:08 PM

Originally posted by commdogg
...As far as the third one walking up and shooting him, the argument that he had no right to fire is kind of like saying you couldnt shoot a dog attacking a little kid, just because the dog isn't directly attacking you. Defending someone else is a legit reason to use force...

So this guy is no better than a dog? Man, society really has gotten bad.
Here's the deal, if this guy was on something, there's a great chance that the cops are probably responcible in part. What I'm trying to get at is the fact that there are cops that are drug dealers and users, they deal and sell drugs (not all mind you, there are a few good ones out there). Why is it like this? Because a lot of the poeple at the top deal and sell, they don't wanna get exposed so the blackmail/bride peoples mouths shut, they also get them sucked into this crap as well. The movie "training Day" is really really close to the truth. Being from a company that had a great relationship with the local law enforcment and seeing the Chief of Police go into the back room and toke it up with the rest of the guys and our drug dealer selling him stuff, kinda opens your eyes. I actually threatened my boss to expose all this and take some legal action, but I only had one other good hearted wittness and the fact that I really had nobody to go to that was in law enforcement, I was more worried about a cop shooting me for trying to expose this crap, or maybe the FBI or who ever would try to frame me for kiddie porn and serial killing, I don't. And the next day we all had to sign this B.S. piece of paper that basicly said "Nobody will do drugs and this rule is subject to change whenever." I was also theatened by my boss, but his threats didn't scare me, I was too worried about the higher ups getting me than his retards makebelive kungfu he thought he knew. So to that cop that posted earlier and everyone who is disagreeing with me on here about what I first posted, think about this. You see something illegal happening in the company you work for, but the cops and some of the higher ups are a part of it. Who do you go to? The cops? Nope, they're in on it. The area director of the FBI? Maybe, but he's more than likely in on it too, so nope. You see so much crime in your nieghborhood, and the criminals are getting away with it, the only reason why they don't come after you is cause of the outreach ministry your parents had that helped many of those people. The cops don't try to do anything about what's going on, you call them if you see two drugdealers shooting at each other in the alley, cops never come by even though their station HQ is only about 5 blocks away. Who do you go to? I hope you folks can see why I know and believe what I do, it's personal experience.

The town I lived in isn't that big, it has a population of less than 200,000, yet we have big time crime there, a heck of a lot of violent crime, around the same amount as Dallas really.

Too many crooked cops, I don't trust any of them, the place I'm living now is a really small town of a couple thousand (at the most) and there are drug dealers down the road, thing is, there cousin is the sheriff, so when we call the cops, nothing ever happens. This is in a rual place too, come on, there must be at least some decent come with a conscience out there that are willing to do something. Or is it that maybe all of the good ones have retired and all we have now are a bunch of drug dealing punks running the show?

Seriously, cops are pretty much worthless these days, all they do is deal drugs and give out speeding tickets. I have personal experience, that is worth a lot more than statistics or one or two cops on here telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, I do.


posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:30 AM
reply to post by jimmyjackblack

Whatever you think about cops in general, crooked, meat eaters, chiorboys, whatever, its off topic and biased. I don't even want to speculate why.
This is about one question. "Was the force justified?"
After that it was a general discussion about the facts as presented as to why the cop thought he had to shoot the guy, and was it a reasonable call. This isn't about the X-Files, devious government agents, or frank serpico, or movies, or cops getting busted selling crack (yeah I've seen it on the news too). This is about 3 street cops, who proabably most likely grew up within 10 miles of where they were, getting into it with some guy at 3 in the morning who, up until the moment one of them shot him, was kicking their asses.
As far as the dog analogy, if it offended you, then you didn't read it. It was an objective comparison, meaning if the threat is deadly to one, its deadly to all, regardless of who or what it is.
All I can say about the "its not fair" argument is what I learned in the military. Real life is not the movies. If my enemy has a weapon that he can kill me with at 300 meters, and I have one that can kill him at 500, then I'm going to stay between 350 and 500 while I shoot it at him. Its not unfair, its reality. The town marshal doesnt throw down his pistol when the bad guy runs out of bullets and pulls out his boot knife. He shoots the dude.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in