01-09-2009, 04:38 PM
CaptainHenreh Wrote:or a taser was intended to be used and a person was shot with a GUN instead.if you believe his weak, after-the-fact excuse, then I think you are being deliberately disengenuous just because it fits your preconception that tasers are evil. As we already talked about earlier in the thread, its is next to impossible to confuse a stun gun with a firearm.
Would the guy still be alive if he had been shot with a taser?
Quote:A firearm is a tool for protection of the police officer and in certain cases those round the officer. A taser should be treated in the same way. If there is no danger to the officer or those in his immediate surroundings, it *should not be used*.absolutely. But this isnt what we are talking about. An officer can misinterpret a situation and misjudge 'danger' level.
Do you think a tool designed only for lethal force is appropriate in all circumstances?
When an officer misreads a situation and makes a mistake. Would you rather them have a tool designed only designed for lethal force, or one that is not? Especially when that situation (as it was misread) does not require lethal force?
Quote:I'm not going to discuss this with you any longer because you're just being obtuse.um. ok. I guess if obtuse = rational. Believe it or not I dont have strong feelings on the issue, but breaking down the problem rationally its pretty clear that the proper tool for the situation should be used, and a firearm is not always the best tool.
And you still havent answered my questions. Taking your toys with you?