5 ms·

Tasers need to go, it's bad enough to treat animals like that. At least before they shoot someone they think twice, and getting into a baton fight means risking

Tasers need to go, it's bad enough to treat animals like that. At least before they shoot someone they think twice, and getting into a baton fight means risking getting hurt; this is not a bad thing in itself; the goal should be to de-escalate any situation and avoid violence.

artorias 9y ago
And how many criminals resisting arrest have you dealt with, this year?
Taek 9y ago
Tasers are a really effective way to neutralize someone violent. If a 200 pound man on drugs is charging at you screaming with rage, a taser gives you a good chance to survive without getting hurt and without shooting anyone. I'm certain that tasers have saved many more lives than they have cost simply because they have as much stopping power as a gun, and sometimes you really need that much stopping power. We need to treat them as dangerous, because they are dangerous. But they have a place in the law enforcement toolkit and it's a very important one.
- QAPereo 9y ago
  If you have that level of certainty that you should have no problem providing proof.
- andreasgonewild 9y ago
  I don't doubt that they are effective, I've seen them being used. What I'm questioning is the states right to treat its citizens like that, no matter how convenient. And they're obviously not as safe as claimed. What it seems to lead to is tasing anyone who doesn't agree with them without missing a beat, is that really the kind of world you want to live in?
- sp332 9y ago
  200 pounds is the average weight of an adult male in the USA.
  - damnfine 9y ago
    That is depressing as hell. I got up that heavy once and life was signifigantly worse.
- Spivak 9y ago
  Sure, but how about we put Tasers in the category of firearm alternative where the victim has better odds of living. Treat Tasers as lethal force and tell officers that if they wouldn't use their firearm then they shouldn't use a Taser either.
  - tomschlick 9y ago
    A taser wont (solely) be used in a lethal force scenario. If someone is threatening an officer with a knife, they counter with their own lethal force. Officers are always +1 on the force level. If you are combative, they use mace/taser, if you have a knife they use a gun, etc. The only exception to this is when an officer has backup on scene and they can coordinate enough to allow one or more to provide lethal cover (guns) while the others try to employ less lethal tactics (taser, mace, beanbag shotgun, etc). This way, if those less lethal items dont work (and they dont 30% of the time) they are not scrambling for their gun while a pissed off suspect is charging with a knife.
    - plopz 9y ago
      Is mace lethal? Putting it at the same force level as tasers seems weird.
      - tomschlick 9y ago
        No, its classified as "less lethal" which is the same as tasers, batons, bean bag rounds, etc. What people don't realize is that before tasers the method of making someone comply (when fighting handcuffs being put on) was batons or actual punches. Yes tasers may cause health issues in 0.001% of uses but batons and punches would cause many more. Also, a lot of officers don't even carry mace anymore as it generally sucks for everyone when its employed. They are going to get it on them via wind or handling the suspect and it impacts their ability to function.
        megous 9y ago
        > Yes tasers may cause health issues in 0.001% of uses... This is simply not true and weakens your argument quite a bit.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  I'd agree with all those points if use of tasers was limited to situations where guns would've previously been used, but their "less lethal" nature has meant they're used in a lot of situations where shooting would never have been acceptable.
- jandrese 9y ago
  Most people don't have a problem with using them in a situation like that, but zapping a tagger in the back is asshole behavior and should not be tolerated. There was no self defense here. The suspect is unlikely to be a danger to the community. It's a disproportionate response that ignores the inherent danger in the technology. I think Police should carry stun guns, but they need to be treated like the potentially deadly weapons that they are.
- athenot 9y ago
  Or... teach the police how to use their elbows, knees and fists. Then again, many members of the police have a hard time chasing a suspect by foot and are nowhere near in condition for even basic martial arts. Fun story: my massage therapist witnessed someone running away from a morbidely obese policeman and asked him if he needed help. Policeman agreed so he chased him accross a small parking lot. The policeman took his car to meet them a few hundred feet away and was still winded from his earlier attempt at running.
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    That's not a fun story. That's a terrifying story. Cops can deputize a random passerby with no training to intervene in a chase?
  - burkaman 9y ago
    That's an and, not an or. Fists are dangerous too if you use them incorrectly. Police should know how to subdue someone with no weapons, a taser, or a gun, and know when each one is appropriate.
  - cc439 9y ago
    >Or... teach the police how to use their elbows, knees and fists. Well say goodbye to women serving as patrol officers. Also, elbows, knees, and fists are lethal weapons, just ask Eric Garner.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  If a 200 pound man on drugs is charging at you screaming with rage, a taser gives you a good chance to survive without getting hurt and without shooting anyone. So do a lot of other methods.
losteric 9y ago
That's a good point, but I think that > At least before they shoot someone they think twice doesn't hold in practice. Fight or flight translates to shoot or run, few police have the discipline to think twice and exercise caution despite personal risk. Tasers were adopted because they are a safer option for both the public and police - situations like this play out with both weapons, but the taser is less likely to be fatal. I think a more effective change is adjustable tasers, with a lower default power level. For most situations, the sheer shock of being electrocuted is enough of an immobilizer - the police don't need to start with enough power to paralyze a PCP fiend...
- iak8god 9y ago
  > few police have the discipline to think twice and exercise caution despite personal risk. Then shouldn't police departments improve their hiring and training practices until this is the case? These are people who are sanctioned to use violence in defense of society. They are widely considered heroes for putting their own lives on the line. It's not too much to ask that they are held to the highest standards of discipline.
  - losteric 9y ago
    Obviously. However, training alone is insufficient - training is the way to trust cops with real guns, but tasers and guns still fill different roles. Tasers are non-lethal ranged weapons, complementing non-lethal close-range (batons/pepper spray) and lethal ranged weapons (guns). To me, this incident highlights a design flaw in tasers - too strong and too inflexible. Years of evidence already highlighted the training failures in some regions.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > Tasers are non-lethal ranged weapons, complementing non-lethal close-range (batons/pepper spray) and lethal ranged weapons (guns). All the examples in that sentence of “non-lethal” weapons are, really, merely less-lethal (than firearms); non-lethal is a factually-inaccurate label used for misleading propaganda purposes.

artorias 9y ago

And how many criminals resisting arrest have you dealt with, this year?

Taek 9y ago

Tasers are a really effective way to neutralize someone violent. If a 200 pound man on drugs is charging at you screaming with rage, a taser gives you a good chance to survive without getting hurt and without shooting anyone. I'm certain that tasers have saved many more lives than they have cost simply because they have as much stopping power as a gun, and sometimes you really need that much stopping power. We need to treat them as dangerous, because they are dangerous. But they have a place in the law enforcement toolkit and it's a very important one.

QAPereo 9y ago
If you have that level of certainty that you should have no problem providing proof.
andreasgonewild 9y ago
I don't doubt that they are effective, I've seen them being used. What I'm questioning is the states right to treat its citizens like that, no matter how convenient. And they're obviously not as safe as claimed. What it seems to lead to is tasing anyone who doesn't agree with them without missing a beat, is that really the kind of world you want to live in?
sp332 9y ago
200 pounds is the average weight of an adult male in the USA.
- damnfine 9y ago
  That is depressing as hell. I got up that heavy once and life was signifigantly worse.
Spivak 9y ago
Sure, but how about we put Tasers in the category of firearm alternative where the victim has better odds of living. Treat Tasers as lethal force and tell officers that if they wouldn't use their firearm then they shouldn't use a Taser either.
- tomschlick 9y ago
  A taser wont (solely) be used in a lethal force scenario. If someone is threatening an officer with a knife, they counter with their own lethal force. Officers are always +1 on the force level. If you are combative, they use mace/taser, if you have a knife they use a gun, etc. The only exception to this is when an officer has backup on scene and they can coordinate enough to allow one or more to provide lethal cover (guns) while the others try to employ less lethal tactics (taser, mace, beanbag shotgun, etc). This way, if those less lethal items dont work (and they dont 30% of the time) they are not scrambling for their gun while a pissed off suspect is charging with a knife.
  - plopz 9y ago
    Is mace lethal? Putting it at the same force level as tasers seems weird.
    - tomschlick 9y ago
      No, its classified as "less lethal" which is the same as tasers, batons, bean bag rounds, etc. What people don't realize is that before tasers the method of making someone comply (when fighting handcuffs being put on) was batons or actual punches. Yes tasers may cause health issues in 0.001% of uses but batons and punches would cause many more. Also, a lot of officers don't even carry mace anymore as it generally sucks for everyone when its employed. They are going to get it on them via wind or handling the suspect and it impacts their ability to function.
      - megous 9y ago
        > Yes tasers may cause health issues in 0.001% of uses... This is simply not true and weakens your argument quite a bit.
ceejayoz 9y ago
I'd agree with all those points if use of tasers was limited to situations where guns would've previously been used, but their "less lethal" nature has meant they're used in a lot of situations where shooting would never have been acceptable.
jandrese 9y ago
Most people don't have a problem with using them in a situation like that, but zapping a tagger in the back is asshole behavior and should not be tolerated. There was no self defense here. The suspect is unlikely to be a danger to the community. It's a disproportionate response that ignores the inherent danger in the technology. I think Police should carry stun guns, but they need to be treated like the potentially deadly weapons that they are.
athenot 9y ago
Or... teach the police how to use their elbows, knees and fists. Then again, many members of the police have a hard time chasing a suspect by foot and are nowhere near in condition for even basic martial arts. Fun story: my massage therapist witnessed someone running away from a morbidely obese policeman and asked him if he needed help. Policeman agreed so he chased him accross a small parking lot. The policeman took his car to meet them a few hundred feet away and was still winded from his earlier attempt at running.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  That's not a fun story. That's a terrifying story. Cops can deputize a random passerby with no training to intervene in a chase?
- burkaman 9y ago
  That's an and, not an or. Fists are dangerous too if you use them incorrectly. Police should know how to subdue someone with no weapons, a taser, or a gun, and know when each one is appropriate.
- cc439 9y ago
  >Or... teach the police how to use their elbows, knees and fists. Well say goodbye to women serving as patrol officers. Also, elbows, knees, and fists are lethal weapons, just ask Eric Garner.
anigbrowl 9y ago
If a 200 pound man on drugs is charging at you screaming with rage, a taser gives you a good chance to survive without getting hurt and without shooting anyone. So do a lot of other methods.

losteric 9y ago

That's a good point, but I think that > At least before they shoot someone they think twice doesn't hold in practice. Fight or flight translates to shoot or run, few police have the discipline to think twice and exercise caution despite personal risk. Tasers were adopted because they are a safer option for both the public and police - situations like this play out with both weapons, but the taser is less likely to be fatal. I think a more effective change is adjustable tasers, with a lower default power level. For most situations, the sheer shock of being electrocuted is enough of an immobilizer - the police don't need to start with enough power to paralyze a PCP fiend...

iak8god 9y ago
> few police have the discipline to think twice and exercise caution despite personal risk. Then shouldn't police departments improve their hiring and training practices until this is the case? These are people who are sanctioned to use violence in defense of society. They are widely considered heroes for putting their own lives on the line. It's not too much to ask that they are held to the highest standards of discipline.
- losteric 9y ago
  Obviously. However, training alone is insufficient - training is the way to trust cops with real guns, but tasers and guns still fill different roles. Tasers are non-lethal ranged weapons, complementing non-lethal close-range (batons/pepper spray) and lethal ranged weapons (guns). To me, this incident highlights a design flaw in tasers - too strong and too inflexible. Years of evidence already highlighted the training failures in some regions.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Tasers are non-lethal ranged weapons, complementing non-lethal close-range (batons/pepper spray) and lethal ranged weapons (guns). All the examples in that sentence of “non-lethal” weapons are, really, merely less-lethal (than firearms); non-lethal is a factually-inaccurate label used for misleading propaganda purposes.