Cops Taze Unarmed Naked Man to Death for "Walking Toward Them'

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Listen, I'm not trying to impugn cops, not at all, and I'm not implying that their intent was to kill.

My perspective.....Intent or not, they killed him, he's dead forever.

Cops don't carry tasers so they can kill people, but they don't carry guns so they can kill people either. They are supposed to carry guns, so they can stop a person/ situation.

Guns are lethal force, to be used in specific circumstances only. I believe that tasers should also be used in situation specific circumstances, but sadly that's not the case.

This case shows it well, but other recent cases do also.

-This case.
-The 10 year old was tased by police for not taking a shower or not going to bed, or whatever.
-the tasing of a 79 year old woman on the side of a highway by a trooper, because she refused to sign the traffic ticket.

There are 100's more examples.

I'm confident that cops have successfully subdued psychotic naked men in the streets literally thousands of times PRE-TASER, so it is possible.

The Taser has become the next step up from saying "do this", instead of being a step down from "Bang, you're dead".




posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman


And anyway, if tasers are so non-lethal, why are they banned for private use in so many jurisdictions?

[edit on 7-12-2009 by apacheman]


hahaha. Dude, I would shoot them at buddies all the time. haha. That's why they are banned from public. The hope that cops are a little more mature about it. But they are people too. You know. You want them to be robots, but they aren't. They are people. I'd hate to have been driving on that road and run over two cops and a naked dude fighting. Tazing was best here.

I've been tazed. It hurts, but I deserved it, because I was going to be very not nice. I also have extensive hand to hand combat training. I would have won an encounter. So I was tazed. They got me. We laughed about it later. It hurt, but it stopped me from doing something very bad. haha. So I'm glad I wasn't shot. I'm glad for the tazer.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Demoncreeper
 


I know people who have incredible strength for their size and yet i can take them down with very little effort and subdue them...there is such things as arm locks body locks which british officers are trained to use. These types of unarmed combat are used for the very reason to contain the subject giving him very little maneoverability. I think you should take a look at how British police subdue unarmed people. And if you think pyschotic episodes are unique to the usa only.......



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
It's like I've pointed out before:

Not once in my life have I personally witnessed a case where calling the cops actually improved the situation.

Any contact with them whatsoever puts a citizen in danger, because they tend to view all citizens as potential threats, and most probably guilty of something, which gives them license to kill with impunity on the grounds they "thought" they were threatened, like that guy in NY five cops shot about twenty times because they shared a delusional state that his wallet was a gun as he was trying to show them id.

They are also almost always cowards who put personal safety over all else.

And people wonder why I hold them in contempt.

They don't protect me, never have, never will. I don't rely on them, don't trust them, won't call them, don't need them.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I disagree with cops use of tazer
they are not Judge Jury and Executioner!
No one has the right to decide who dies by Electrocution!



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Rhetoric
 


I know. I know. There is misuse for sure. I even started my own thread about the 10 year old. That # makes me sick. That is "lazy" cops.

I just don't think this was overboard. But maybe there are variable that I am missing too.

LOL at the guy not wanting to run over two officers and a naked guy fighting.

@ loner007

I know man. I was always first to jump in, myself. I've caused injuries, and been injured. All following the guidelines of "use of force". I've come across people super strong for their age.

I always wanted to come work on that side of the water and work with some British officers..


But people off their meds, like the woman I mentioned before...paranoid schizophrenia...are very dangerous.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by Demoncreeper]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


Hallelujah man!
I have called the cops ONE time in my whole life and I only did it that one time to protect my innocence in a situation that was caused by my X-wife during a custody issue almost a decade ago.
People now days are to quick to call the cops for situations that could be resolved by something as simple as diplomacy and understanding and im some cases proper parenting.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
It's like I've pointed out before:

Not once in my life have I personally witnessed a case where calling the cops actually improved the situation.

Any contact with them whatsoever puts a citizen in danger, because they tend to view all citizens as potential threats, and most probably guilty of something, which gives them license to kill with impunity on the grounds they "thought" they were threatened, like that guy in NY five cops shot about twenty times because they shared a delusional state that his wallet was a gun as he was trying to show them id.

They are also almost always cowards who put personal safety over all else.

And people wonder why I hold them in contempt.

They don't protect me, never have, never will. I don't rely on them, don't trust them, won't call them, don't need them.


Sorry that the news doesn't report how many get saved from perilous situations. I'm sorry they don't show how many people thank the police for services rendered. How many children who's lives WERE saved from bad people in the JOE PUBLIC. Yeah, people are innocent until proven guilty, but there are WAY more ugly people out there than you can imagine.
I'm sure the news thrives on doom and gloom stories, because it renders people depressed, staying in their house buying cable to watch more doom and gloom.

I liked to HELP people. I wish people weren't bad. But they are.. Maybe I'll take a picture of the Christmas cards I get from families I don't even remember helping, because it was just part of my job, yet they sent me cards every year. Police aren't the enemy. Police are people. A lot of people are bad. Sometimes those people can end up in uniform


The bad ones stick out, because they ARE held to higher standard. There's a difference from standing out because you are bad, and being hunted out by people that hate all law enforcement.



[edit on 7-12-2009 by Demoncreeper]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
 

Like I said, if he was just a normal dude, hopefully a bit different approach would have been used. Like reason, or some other tactical communication.

This was a guy in a full psychotic episode.


Are you even aware of that "psychotic" does NOT equal "dangerous"? And how can you even diagnose the guy as being "psychotic" without having proper medical training? Police officers have a tendency to equal all kinds of conditions, including asthma, allergies and epilepsy, with "dangerous".

Isn't it so that the only kind of person a police officer considers entirely safe is either dead, sleeping, in coma or on valium?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
I'm pretty certain force would have had to be used. Any force can kill. Tackling him, he could smash his head and bleed out on the brain, ribs can break puncturing organs and veins causing death, carotid restraint could have been applied, (also COULD cause death), pepper spray, can cause choking AND or allergic reactions, impact weapons can cause broken blood vessels, internal bleeding. All these things could happen. All of those things are "LESS LETHAL FORCE"


By your reasoning, the right thing to do then was to use deadly force right from the start as it is "cleaner".


You seem to think their intent WAS to kill him.


Well obviously it was as the taser operators... I mean police officers, who one would assume to have had proper training, applied the device near the heart, which is lethal. And not only once, but twice.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
What happened to the cop after the murderer? Is the officer still on the police force after killing?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by moniker

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
 

Like I said, if he was just a normal dude, hopefully a bit different approach would have been used. Like reason, or some other tactical communication.

This was a guy in a full psychotic episode.


Are you even aware of that "psychotic" does NOT equal "dangerous"? And how can you even diagnose the guy as being "psychotic" without having proper medical training? Police officers have a tendency to equal all kinds of conditions, including asthma, allergies and epilepsy, with "dangerous".

Isn't it so that the only kind of person a police officer considers entirely safe is either dead, sleeping, in coma or on valium?


Psychotic episodes equal unpredictability. Violence is actually infrequent among a lot mentally ill patients. The ones law enforcement are called to handle usually are dangerous/violent. Hence the reason law enforcement was called.

I didn't diagnose him. In the article it said, the wife informed the dispatcher of the psychotic condition of the husband.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 



Washington County Attorney Brock Belnap included the interview transcript with a statement Thursday in which he announced Thompson was justified in using force on
Excell and attorney Peter Stirba, who represents Hurricane police, on Thursday called the investigation into Thompson's actions "thorough." They are pleased Thompson was vindicated, as they believed he would be based on the evidence.



Thompson told investigators Cardall wouldn't comply with his commands and that Cardall, who was unarmed, came at him. "So I [stunned] him," Thompson said. "And he went down kind of went off to my left away from the road. And then he tried to get back up and so I [stunned] him again." Thompson said Anna Cardall was telling her husband to "get down on the ground" and "do what they say." He described the scene with Cardall moving back and forth between his wife, the chief and himself as "chaos." Thompson said he chose to deploy the Taser on Cardall when the man came at him in what he perceived was a more direct manner. "He was coming right at me ... right before I [stunned] him he went from you know -- 10,15 or 20 feet to 5 feet just like that." Thompson said he understood a Taser to be a "less than lethal" weapon that could "help bring an uncontrollable person under control, without, you know, without killing them.


Source

[edit on 12/7/2009 by Kr0n0s]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
I see a lot of criticism, from people who don't offer a single answer that could help an officer do their job.


An officer should already know how to do his or her job, and what the purpose of his or her job is.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by moniker

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
I'm pretty certain force would have had to be used. Any force can kill. Tackling him, he could smash his head and bleed out on the brain, ribs can break puncturing organs and veins causing death, carotid restraint could have been applied, (also COULD cause death), pepper spray, can cause choking AND or allergic reactions, impact weapons can cause broken blood vessels, internal bleeding. All these things could happen. All of those things are "LESS LETHAL FORCE"


By your reasoning, the right thing to do then was to use deadly force right from the start as it is "cleaner".



Are you serious? haha. So by your complaining about what tools are offered to use, they should have sat down and sang him a lullaby until his meds kick in?.

Don't make assumptions, pal. That isn't my reasoning, that is your inability to understand how the statement was used to say that any force has the potential to be deadly. It's not intended to be deadly.

Like I said before...lot of criticism, no useful answers to alternative tools.



[edit on 7-12-2009 by Demoncreeper]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Demoncreeper
 


I offered possible alternatives in one of my previous posts, i guess you over looked it.

And yes, i would expect them to spend more than 40 seconds trying to talk the man down but im afraid that either cops have lost their social skills or it is being left out of training, possibly to make room for taser training.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   
In other words, 350 people who were probably just having a bad day have died, rather than these weenie cops manhandling them, which worked just fine in the old days. The weenies wait until they have them back at jail though (if the taze didn't kill them) and when they have them cornered, 3 or 4 of them will manhandle them then, just for the fun of it. They are thugs with badges.

I read a book last summer I highly recommend called Inside Folsom Prison. One of the wardens said this: kids that are pushed around when growing up end up becoming criminals as adults, or they go into law enforcement where they can finally have some power.

I've never been arrested or even close to it, I have just always had a disdain for BULLIES.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper

Originally posted by moniker

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
 

Like I said, if he was just a normal dude, hopefully a bit different approach would have been used. Like reason, or some other tactical communication.

This was a guy in a full psychotic episode.


Are you even aware of that "psychotic" does NOT equal "dangerous"? And how can you even diagnose the guy as being "psychotic" without having proper medical training? Police officers have a tendency to equal all kinds of conditions, including asthma, allergies and epilepsy, with "dangerous".

Isn't it so that the only kind of person a police officer considers entirely safe is either dead, sleeping, in coma or on valium?


Psychotic episodes equal unpredictability. Violence is actually infrequent among a lot mentally ill patients. The ones law enforcement are called to handle usually are dangerous/violent. Hence the reason law enforcement was called.

I didn't diagnose him. In the article it said, the wife informed the dispatcher of the psychotic condition of the husband.


Exactly so, she called the police to inform them that there was little danger and that the medications would kick in soon. The police obviously took the opportunity to rush there and apply lethal force before the medications had a chance to start working. She did not call them and ask for help.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper

Originally posted by moniker

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
I'm pretty certain force would have had to be used. Any force can kill. Tackling him, he could smash his head and bleed out on the brain, ribs can break puncturing organs and veins causing death, carotid restraint could have been applied, (also COULD cause death), pepper spray, can cause choking AND or allergic reactions, impact weapons can cause broken blood vessels, internal bleeding. All these things could happen. All of those things are "LESS LETHAL FORCE"


By your reasoning, the right thing to do then was to use deadly force right from the start as it is "cleaner".



Are you serious? haha. So by your complaining about what tools are offered to use, they should have sat down and sang him a lullaby until his meds kick in?.


Yes.

That would have been "better" (in the ordinary sense of the word) than killing him, don't you think?

What do you think is so funny about that?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist
A crash tackle from a couple of 100kg cops could do some major damage.



CT


How considerate of them for killing him with a tazer instead


This is a second line (I'm shaking my head in disbelief as I type it)

[edit on 7/12/2009 by Dagar]





top topics
 
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join