01-09-2009, 01:54 PM
Ginger and I are on the same page.
From the hula-hoop article:
Now. Thank God she didn't have a heart attack and die, but would the officer have shot her if she didn't comply? Was this guy Robocop? No, of course he wouldn't have. But since he had the less-lethal taser (notice they don't call them 'non-lethal' anymore) he was cavalier about using it. After all, no harm no foul, right?
On the other hand, if the officer had taken the time to more adequately assess the situation, there's no way this would have happened.
Same with the BART rider. The guy was belly down, subdued...why'd he need to be tased? When someone is lying on the ground saying 'Please don't tase me', I think it's probably ok to, you know, not tase them. Oh, except that guy ended up dead.
Gerald is correct, in a sense, that this is a training issue. But it wouldn't be an issue at all if they didn't have them. I don't know of anyone who would continue to do an activity after they were told to stand down by someone holding a gun. Why the need for the taser?
Are shootings by police down? We know (obviously) that tasings are up...have fewer people been shot because of it? If not, then it seems to me all that's happening is some people are getting tased for no clear reason.
I'm rambling, but I don't think I'm wrong.
From the hula-hoop article:
Quote:We're not defending it as best practice," Pishko said. However, "Officer Parks didn't know he was dealing with a citizen who was brain-injured.... All he knew was she was noncompliant and agitated."
Pishko said he supported dismissing the criminal charges against Brown because there wouldn't have been any point to prosecuting them. Further, he said, Brown had not suffered any serious injury from the shocks.
"The officer misjudged," Pishko said. "He didn't realize she was brain-damaged and overreacted."
Now. Thank God she didn't have a heart attack and die, but would the officer have shot her if she didn't comply? Was this guy Robocop? No, of course he wouldn't have. But since he had the less-lethal taser (notice they don't call them 'non-lethal' anymore) he was cavalier about using it. After all, no harm no foul, right?
On the other hand, if the officer had taken the time to more adequately assess the situation, there's no way this would have happened.
Same with the BART rider. The guy was belly down, subdued...why'd he need to be tased? When someone is lying on the ground saying 'Please don't tase me', I think it's probably ok to, you know, not tase them. Oh, except that guy ended up dead.
Gerald is correct, in a sense, that this is a training issue. But it wouldn't be an issue at all if they didn't have them. I don't know of anyone who would continue to do an activity after they were told to stand down by someone holding a gun. Why the need for the taser?
Are shootings by police down? We know (obviously) that tasings are up...have fewer people been shot because of it? If not, then it seems to me all that's happening is some people are getting tased for no clear reason.
I'm rambling, but I don't think I'm wrong.
1987 Oldsmobile Cutlass 442