If you think that's bad, just wait until the police (the bad ones at least) will Tase someone will all three shots and then after they die will claim that the subject was still a threat and had to be shocked again.

Its just a matter of time...

Originally posted by MagoSA
If you think that's bad, just wait until the police (the bad ones at least) will Tase someone will all three shots and then after they die will claim that the subject was still a threat and had to be shocked again.

Its just a matter of time...

Oh my god , didn't think of that. Yeah I would say you would probably die.....fricken yikes. In the article it says the cheered and clap when it was introduced/presented...

[edit on 9/16/2009 by Grayelf2009]

Well in the name of balanced debate, real law enforcers are bound to be happy about this . This technicaly means that they will have a less than lethal takedown weapon, which can incapacitate more than one person at a time. This has obvious advantages over the regular tazer , and the standard issue police sidearm.
First of all, ANY option which means less bullets and blood is a good option , thats obvious. Second, the original air tazer was a one shot tool, meaning that once fired, the officer in control of the weapon would have to draw a gun to defend themselves from another armed opponent. This is a tricky thing to do when handling a device like a tazer. The new one makes it possible to put three enemies in a compliant state, without ever having to draw a gun.
Now Im not stupid. I know that SOME law enforcers do not behave in an acceptable manner, but that really cant be helped except by political and legal investigation. Quite simply , if you are that worried about it , run for mayor or congress or some political station like that, and do something the hell about it . Otherwise you are merely widdling in the wind, and thats pathetic. Not manful at all . Goodness sake have some dignity . Meanwhile dont hamstring good enforcement officials , they have a tough job to do , and enough problems already without people telling them that effective tools merely give them the power to do more wrong.

Originally posted by MagoSA
Its just a matter of time...

A matter of time? That's the first thing they'll do. They already have a habit of firing 3 or 4 tasers into the same person, and ONE taser is already way more powerful than it ever needed to be. They fire, what, 10-15 shocks with each hit? I haven't yet seen anybody fail to go down at the first shock.

Just one shock from one of these can pose many very serious health risks. They should be banned, not applauded, IMO.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
This technicaly means that they will have a less than lethal takedown weapon

The correct term is "Less Lethal". Adding the "than" in the middle makes them sound safer than they actually are. In many cases they are not immediately lethal but can and do cause serious problems later on, up to and including death.

Point is there are plenty of NON lethal alternatives they could use, if they bothered to develop them further.

[edit on 16-9-2009 by Clickfoot]

Sandbag Shotguns?

Rubber bullets or Wax Bullets?

Pepper Spray Paintball guns?

vortex ring gun?

That is worrying! They say it is a non-lethal way of taking someone out, when there is enough evidence to suggest that it is lethal to some people! However they still continue using them!

Then they make this goliath of a gun...

Every one is complaining that Tazars are not totally non-lethal. But nothing can ever be truly and totally non-lethal. I say, it is better then a bullet, that is 99% fatal. And if a crazed gunman is killed by one, well he would have been shot anyway, and if you are going to threaten someones life, you cant complain when yours becomes endangered. But, when the police use them in every situation, like zapping a lady for answering back to him, then it is the police force that should looked into. The more weapons like this the better.

tasers are slowly being banned around the world as lethel weapons - yet the US stills uses it