Why does this have to happen...

Autistic Teen Tasered in Calif.

www.newsvine.com

TUSTIN — Sheriff's officials defended their use of a Taser stun gun to subdue an autistic teenager who left a social services center where he was being treated.

"It was necessary," sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino said in defense of the use of a Taser stun gun to subdue 15-year-old Taylor Karras.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
hosted.ap.org
www.nbc17.com
www.sfgate.com
www.montereyherald.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread303963/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread234165/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread143661/pg5
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread123902/pg1

[edit on 20-9-2007 by Sanity Lost]

These stories are appearing more and more every day. People are getting killed or unnessacarily injured due to poor training in the use of the taser gun by the police around the USA. Let's put and end to this. Complain, complain, complain.

www.newsvine.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Well, straight from the article:

"If that were your son, would you want him Tased or hit by a car?"

I'm glad we have tasers...there's probably less unecessary shooting deaths because of them.

Sorry about the duplicate post

Originally posted by uberarcanist
"If that were your son, would you want him Tased or hit by a car?"

The choice should be neither. Why didn't they attempt to stop the traffic in order to subdue him in a more practical manner. Being tasered he most likely feel to the street. Oncomming motorist might not see him and run him over anyway. With others (the motorist) in the area, using a firearm to stop him would be even more of a danger.

Of course we can always blame the security set up at the building he ran from as well.

Originally posted by uberarcanist


I'm glad we have tasers...there's probably less unecessary shooting deaths because of them.

How about no shooting and no tasers used? How about hauling people to cool their heels in jail overnight and going thru the proper channels?
Is that not acceptable anymore?

It seems to me that worked for hundreds of years, whats with the tasers now? To dubdue people? Like little old ladies, or people who are already on the ground, or children, or pregnant women? Is that not good enough anymore?
Do we have to use brutality and pain, and possible death on a 6 year old who's acting up?

Is that what you're advocating?????

I swear if I read one more story about a taser incident that was unnecessary ...I'm gonna



Edited cause my stupid spelling finger has a mind of it's own today..GRRR...


[edit on 20-9-2007 by AccessDenied]

reply to post by dgtempe

Do we have to use brutality and pain, and possible death on a 6 year old who's acting up?

Good point. It looks like simple plans to complex problems is the current thinking of our leaders.

AccessDenied

Edited cause my stupid spelling finger has a mind of it's own today..GRRR...

Maybe the spelling fingers are trying to take over the world.

I'll have to check and see if there is a ATS thread on that.

Below is one of about 6 YouTube Videos Taylor Karras made sometime before the taser incident. This video has nothing to do with the taser story it's just a way to let you see him in person. The video is about the results of some vitamin pak he has been testing.

Strangly enough I have not found any updates to his story except a few pages that are no longer available.







[edit on 31-10-2007 by Sanity Lost]

If they're so insistent that 'tazing is better than shooting', then why not invest in one of those 'net guns'. You've seen them, shoots out a capsule that releases a net, trapping the person.



My guess it they'll claim it's too expensive. Wonder if they talk about 'acceptable loss/risk' when they deply tazers. How many civilian deaths are acceptable?

reply to post by dgtempe


I think they need to institute a system where anytime they draw the tazer (even if they don't shoot it) they have to fill out a report AND maybe go before a board of civilian and IAD to explain their use.

IOW, keep it easy to use over a gun, but make it administratively VERY difficult and onerous to use.

In a system like that the cop wouldn't hesitate to taze if the situation REALLY called for it, but due to their hatred of administrative review and lots of paperwork, wouldn't draw it for trivial or anger reasons.

Of course they'd find ways around that, but in the cases where we have it on film, they couldn't deny it. Thus the real deterrent would be:
1. not backed for trivial use by upper mgmt (I suspect the reverse is true)
2. lots of cameras around now-a-days virtually guarantee everything caught on video.

Just like I think the cameras in the squad cars have done a lot to help curb the somewhat natural urge for aggression on the part of the cops.

(Parenthetically, I think a big step is recognizing that this 'aggro response' does occur in normal people. You chase some nut in your car for 10 miles and see if you don't want to kick his butt when you get him stopped. They can take classes and learn how to see and deal with this.)

2 cents.

[edit on 31-10-2007 by Badge01]