3 ms·

I’m with you. I have no idea how this can be legal, superhuman strength or otherwise. What the hell has happened to due process?

aerostable_slug 2y ago
What does due process have to do with subduing combative subjects, preventing persons from harming themselves or others, or other lawful uses of force? Due process doesn't come into whether or not a police shooting is justified, for example. Or the use of a Taser, nightstick, carotid restraint, pepper spray, or a simple arm bar.
llamaimperative 2y ago
Would you prefer that people sufficiently hopped up on drugs are allowed to run rampant over anything in civilization? Obviously an extreme scenario but the reality is that civilization must maintain order and yeah, people in general have no problem giving drugs to people who are actively attacking them. The trick, of course, is how to allow that to happen^ while also not authorizing a total descent into authoritarian rule.
- trust_bt_verify 2y ago
  Maybe people in these orderly civilizations should figure out how to do that with less death? Let’s push ourselves to be better here. I don’t see the suggestion made anywhere that we let society fall to rampant running drug users. Arguably this is already happening though, see Diana Kipyokei.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    The suggestion is literally not to sedate violent people “without due process.” Of course sedating actively violent people is within due process (which is why it’s able to happen repeatedly), but presumably GP is suggesting something closer to acquiring a specific warrant or court order to authorize it. Of course this doesn’t address an emergency situation, so the alternatives are 1) more aggressive/more likely-to-be-deadly force, or 2) don’t stop them at all. Yes obviously we should strive for zero deaths in these encounters.

3 ms·

I’m with you. I have no idea how this can be legal, superhuman strength or otherwise. What the hell has happened to due process?

by qeternity 2y ago

aerostable_slug 2y ago
What does due process have to do with subduing combative subjects, preventing persons from harming themselves or others, or other lawful uses of force? Due process doesn't come into whether or not a police shooting is justified, for example. Or the use of a Taser, nightstick, carotid restraint, pepper spray, or a simple arm bar.
llamaimperative 2y ago
Would you prefer that people sufficiently hopped up on drugs are allowed to run rampant over anything in civilization? Obviously an extreme scenario but the reality is that civilization must maintain order and yeah, people in general have no problem giving drugs to people who are actively attacking them. The trick, of course, is how to allow that to happen^ while also not authorizing a total descent into authoritarian rule.
- trust_bt_verify 2y ago
  Maybe people in these orderly civilizations should figure out how to do that with less death? Let’s push ourselves to be better here. I don’t see the suggestion made anywhere that we let society fall to rampant running drug users. Arguably this is already happening though, see Diana Kipyokei.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    The suggestion is literally not to sedate violent people “without due process.” Of course sedating actively violent people is within due process (which is why it’s able to happen repeatedly), but presumably GP is suggesting something closer to acquiring a specific warrant or court order to authorize it. Of course this doesn’t address an emergency situation, so the alternatives are 1) more aggressive/more likely-to-be-deadly force, or 2) don’t stop them at all. Yes obviously we should strive for zero deaths in these encounters.