Tasers!! Dangerous? Deadly? NO! And here is why...

reply to post by Signals


No mearly what im trying to point out is that Pepper spray, battons, tasers, what have you are just tools! They are not the Police officer. Police today are HIGHLY trained to defuse situations. I spend almost the same time training that I do in the field working!

We need to stop saying that police are less effective now because they have all these different tools. They are MORE effective hence why the incident related injuries on both patrols and subjects are decreasing GREATLY over the years.

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier


Occurs the "Tasers are safe" . . . is the stupid people that get taser and died from it the ones that are dangerous.

What else can somebody promoting tasers can be doing but defend them,The same logic been use by the OP to defend death from tasers is the same logic been used by the manufactures.

Originally posted by ThePeoplesSoldier

Yes I have been tased to answer your question, and if you bothered to read the report you would see that its just an example of somthing simular. A taser focuses on the nervous system in repeated bursts. The reason you were left incompacitated is because thats how it is designed to work. The statistics dont lie, and if you don't like my research do some of your own before you call me un-educated.

Did you write that blog? No?

THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!

Daaaaaaa

And I don't need to do research of my own.. I have absolutely no interest in a blog that is trying to tell me something completely irrelevant to me.. especially when the points that it is trying to make in regards effects of tazers are for the want of a better word.. stupid.

I would much prefer to be a pain in the arse tbh

[edit on 9/12/09 by Dermo]

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier


You can NEVER be 100% sure a Taser will be safe for a person. This is just Stupid. I say this because you never know if a person has implants like a pacemaker or is already in bad health heart wise. It doesn't take much to disrupt the electrical impulses of the human heart.

What are you going to do? Have the suspect fill out a medical history before you shoot him.

You see, you are a cop. You have bought into all the BS they want cops to believe to do their job without a conscious.

It is a FACT, a medical Doctor would not put that type of electricity through a person without a medical history first.. so why is it o.k. if a cop does it?

The first time you taze someone and they die on you, I wonder how you will feel about it then.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


HAHAHA WOW! You need to read all of the posts before you post. Tasers use less amperage then a defibulator (that btw docters use without a medical history) and also a heart needs 300 amps same as a pace maker to effect it. Tasers only transfer .0021 mili amps FAR less then what it would take to effect a heart or pacemaker.. RESEARCH BEFORE POSTING

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier


You do understand that your source comes from Taser International right? These guys are the ones who make these tasers, test them, and than tell you their safe.

Taser International

Please do some research before saying how these are safe. For it to be safe, it must assure no deaths or harm on an individual. This has proven to be deadly over and over again. If tasers were safe, I think every citizen should carry one.

reply to post by Equinox99


In fact I knew somone would say that is my source. No in fact I went to multiple sources on the internet. www.goolge.com search TASER : FACTS
Read

Originally posted by ThePeoplesSoldier
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

HAHAHA WOW! You need to read all of the posts before you post. Tasers use less amperage then a defibulator (that btw docters use without a medical history) and also a heart needs 300 amps same as a pace maker to effect it. Tasers only transfer .0021 mili amps FAR less then what it would take to effect a heart or pacemaker.. RESEARCH BEFORE POSTING

HAHAHAHA.. WOW, Perhaps a healthy heart but if you re-read my post you would know that I am talking about pacemakers and hearts that are Not healthy! Hence the medical history! DOH!

Again, you cannot be 100% sure! You are so full of yourself.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


If that is your argument then why even have police at all? Why not just make it a phone service. If I shoot somone with a gun it will kill them or seriously wound them. If I hit them with pepper spray they may choke to death or have to have there eyes pulled out and washed. If I hit them with a batton then they could break bones or die. If I use the k-9 they could get there bones broke or meat bitten off. The Post wasnt about them being perfectly safe its just about alot of myths that people have about them and that people want police not to use them. Next to verbal skills its probly the best weapon a patrol has.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


After doing a littler bit of the research on tasers and the complains that has been on going with the human rights violations reports that amnesty USA is been reviewing,

www.amnestyusa.org...

I kind of have mix feeling about the OP purpose. . .

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier


I did, everyone is getting their sources from the same place you are. Many sources say that there hasn't been enough experiments done, or that testing were done on healthy people. You must also remember that tasers cause the muscles to contract, rendering breathing difficult. Having 3 200 pound guys subduing you while you try to breath doesn't make it any easier.

I would rather cops use tasers then guns, but at the same time, cops must be trained in tasers. Learning to shoot them is not being trained. I am talking about when to subdue the person, what they can and can't do. Don't tell me every cp is trained because if they were, we wouldn't have any deaths.

Cops are also forgetting to put people's hearts into perspective. The guys being tested on are usually young and strong, so it doesn't justify tasering an old person and saying, "tests showed it was safe".

reply to post by Equinox99
[more

Now that is somthing I can agree on. You can never have enough training regaurdless how much you THINK you have. Also I think that since these are still fairly new we really cant predict if it will have effects after a couple decades. On the same token though if only 1 person out of ever 1000 has a negitive effect to it then I would say that it is still better than going hands on with somone and possibly both people getting injured. The reports I read said that after 1 million people tested no one died from it. IF thats valid then this is a much safer means then pepper spray or any of the other tools police use. Its not ment for determent or tourcher its ment to save lives, so lets look at the big picture. There will always be those few cases of somone that has an adverse reaction to somthing. But I think the main reason people see so many issues with this is because its SO successfull all the times its not a problem no one hears about it. Look at the statistics of injuries that have gone down related to incidents with combative subjects. Injuries dropped by almost 70% in most cases. I would say thats an over all success.

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier

I believe a cop should be able to use force to subdue an attacker if his life is CLEARLY in danger. But tasers are being used on children and old people and people are getting hurt needlessly.

It is being abused.

If bullet holes were not so messy and easy to hurt someone cops would be shooting people more too. The reason why they don't is it's too easy to get pulled into court for misuse.

Tasers give bad cops an excuse to hurt people. Their training should teach a grown man how to subdue a child without a taser. If a cop cant do it without a taser, that person has no business being a cop.

Taser shooting should be scrutinized by the same laws gun use is. It must be clear that a cops life is in danger before he uses one, otherwise all you have is the potential for abuse.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


It is... The last report I saw was 51 cases in court agenst the taser company and 51 cases thrown out.

It's good to know tasers aren't deadly, or even dangerous. Anyone who goes to a protest rally should carry one. Then if a LEO breaks the law by infringing on your constitutional rights, you can perform a citizens arrest and taze them if they resist arrest. Keep tazing them as often as needed, in your opinion, until they stop resisting arrest, or die, whichever comes first. After all, that is a police-approved arrest proceedure.

If you have to go to court, you may not be able to bring a gun, but you can bring a tazer, since it's not deadly or dangerous. Instead of getting you kid a bike for Christmas, get them a tazer so they can take it to school. After all, it's not like a tazer is dangerous or deadly, so no one should really have a problem with it. You see a LEO breaking the law, citizens arrest. If they resist, you know what to do.

I'd be willing to bet that after a few LEOs die from being tazed, they'll stop calling it "non-lethal".

Originally posted by ThePeoplesSoldier
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

It is... The last report I saw was 51 cases in court agenst the taser company and 51 cases thrown out.

The taser company?? That's not what I am talking about and you know it.. the taser company doesn't get put on trial for misuse of the taser.. the cop does.

When a cop misuses a firearm do you put Smith and Wesson on trial?

You prove to me a cop tazing a ten year old girl did so because there was proof his life was in danger and he had no other way to subdue her and I will let you tase me twice.. you can't do it.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by JohnPhoenix]

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


I said earlier that there are people that abuse what they have. HOWEVER, there are atleast 10 that dont for every 1 that does. So people that generlize police for the actions of 1 are WRONG. Im a police officer and I dont generlize the American public because somone drinks and drives. I don't go out and say "oh your not a cop well you people piss me off because your nothing but a bunch of law breaking hethins. NO instead I put the blame where it is due. Perhaps thats were my anger truely lies. At the people the group all the police into one group. There are MANY police officers that I know that only want people to be safe. They go out and hunt for nothing but people that drink and drive, or sell drugs... Would you defend those people so whillingly? Would you say those police abuse their power because they are trying to make YOUR and MY streets safer?

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier

When deaths are considered "excited delirium", something that is not a recognised medical condition, it's natural that there isn't any real way of wining, right? After all, the death certificate doesn't say "death by Taser (tm)".

I noticed you did not commented my previous post, in which I talked about Taser International's bulletin saying that for safety reasons and to have better chances of wining court cases, the Taser should not be used on the chest.

What do you have to say about that?

Thanks in advance.

I am not sure how I lost you by stating that I replied to you in the thread about the naked man being tazed to death but apparently you have been replying on many threads about dead naked men this morning. I will try asking here.

You put forth the premise that static from the carpet is more deadly than tazers.

How many people die a year from a tazer and how many from carpet shocks?

reply to post by ThePeoplesSoldier


I do not lump all cops together. There are good cops and bad cops. I have said as much in many post on ATS. If you have 1000 cops and 1 out of 10 abuse the taser, then you have 100 more criminals on the streets than you had before in the form of bad cops and a lot of cops won't turn the bad ones in, they stick up for each other.. that makes matters worse.

Am I a cop hater? You betcha, but no more than you should hate anyone who abuses their power. If you don't hate the bad ones then you have a serious problem.