Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
OverSword

Use of Taser is not unconstitutional

80 posts in this topic

How is it "safer" if one party is dead or permanently debilitated?

Did I miss something?...Did she die or become permanently disabled?

And, did you see this?

Because Williams spat at Taylor, he was within his rights to use the taser, as he was attempting to “control her behavior,” rather than purposefully injure her, argues the attorney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it "safer" if one party is dead or permanently debilitated?

And yes, they are safer.......I love Scientific data / studies :clap::tu:

Using a Taser to subdue a violent suspect is safer than police batons and fists. That is the surprising conclusion of a study of incidents in which US police used force to tackle a person who was resisting arrest.

Several suspects have died in the US after being tasered, and human rights groups have spoken out against the weapons, also called conductive electrical devices (CEDs). But John MacDonald of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia and colleagues have found they seem to result in fewer injuries than more conventional methods such as batons.

The team examined over 24,000 cases where police had used force, including almost 5500 incidents involving a Taser. After controlling for factors such as the amount of resistance shown by the suspect, they found that Taser use reduced the overall risk of injury by 65 per cent.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18168-tasers-safer-than-batons-and-fists.html

Hard to argue facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point.

However, replace the 'Taser use' with a punch in the nose and imagine the same situations we've seen. Imagine the backlash and calls for reform we'd see.

a punch to the face may actually be more lethal then a taser.

We in Oz have seen a litany of "he was hit once in the face, fell to the ground and died" on the news these past few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cops are far too Taser ready. I'm not sure how inflicting that much pain on someone is justifiable for some of the stuff we see them use it on.

And that's where it becomes unconstitutional. Cops deliberately escalating situations where people are exercising their rights, like the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taser used on woman who tried to buy extra iPhones

http://news.yahoo.co...7--finance.html

cops are too taser happy

I would have bet a million bucks that the link would have a video that showed nothing before the woman was tased, like almost every other video of supposed police violence (I was right). Why is that, do you think? It’s because it looks better for the news and worst for the police.

The woman was not tased because she tried to buy extra iphones, she was tased because she would not leave the store, would not leave after police told her to, and because she resisted arrest. For the store to call the police, she was not just standing there doing nothing, she was most likely causing a scene.

And I don’t believe for a second that she did not understand what the store was asking. If you watch the video she has a 12 year old daughter that speaks perfect English, which means that she has been around English speaking people for years. And she had no trouble before buying the other iphones.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that's where it becomes unconstitutional. Cops deliberately escalating situations where people are exercising their rights, like the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments.

No they don't, some people just think their rights are more then what they are. The 1st amendment does not give you the right to do and say what ever you want. The 4th amendment does not give you the right to resisted arrest. And the 5th amendment does not give you the right to not answer police when they question you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love when police policy becomes the doctrine. What a *** joke and those that defend it are just as stupid as they are the so called do gooders that promote facisim and it extreme. Do as we say or we f u up. Fn a holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they don't, some people just think their rights are more then what they are. The 1st amendment does not give you the right to do and say what ever you want. The 4th amendment does not give you the right to resisted arrest. And the 5th amendment does not give you the right to not answer police when they question you.

and no amendment gives a cop the right to be judge jury and hand down a sentance of any kind. Being spit on is a pusy way of saying Im a fasciacist and serve the master then tazer them .

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and no amendment gives a cop the right to be judge jury and hand down a sentance of any kind. Being spit on is a pusy way of saying Im a fasciacist and serve the master then tazer them .

Never said it does.

Did you know that spitting on someone is assault? That woman could of had any number of diseases that could be harmful, the police had every right to protect themselves from that.

Edited by Odin11
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they don't, some people just think their rights are more then what they are. The 1st amendment does not give you the right to do and say what ever you want. The 4th amendment does not give you the right to resisted arrest. And the 5th amendment does not give you the right to not answer police when they question you.

Actualy thats exactly what the 5th gives you the right to do.

Edited by preacherman76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never said it does.

Did you know that spitting on someone is assault? That woman could of had any number of diseases that could be harmful, the police had every right to protect themselves from that.

So then put a face mask on her. Jolting a women with 50,000 volts WHILE HAND CUFFED, is a out right abuse of authority. He wasnt following policy, he was seeking revenge. The freakin guy pulled the barbs outta her chest, instead of taking her to a hospital to have them safely removed. Which is policy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love when police policy becomes the doctrine. What a *** joke and those that defend it are just as stupid as they are the so called do gooders that promote facisim and it extreme. Do as we say or we f u up. Fn a holes.

I am glad I could care less what people here think of me.

Spit in their face, tazer........Tazers safer then physical take downs.

Spit in a strangers face in a Bar and I bet you get worse then a tazer results.

Don't put yourself in these situations, and you will not have to worry about it will you....Get drunk and stupid, be ready for the consequences.

Those that do not agree have their opinions, I have mine. In this topic, that opinion does not make someone stupid, maybe ignorant.

Edited by Sakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get real! She is like 4 foot 9 and 120 pounds. Two cops could each grab one arm and take her, heels dragging to the drunk tank and put her in. What if she had died for this? Though not too common people do die from being tazed. But no big deal right? We wouldn't want the delicated little cop to break a nail.

I'm the same size as she is,and I could subdue her on my own.Anyone with self defense training,which cops get a ton of,can stop someone with one joint lock . Two people can do it easily ,no taser .

Check this one out. Woman in a mall ,Xmas shopping ,doesn't speak English .

She was buying iPhones ,so they tasered her .Mall security ,who are not cops .

http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/xiaojie-li-woman-in-mall-tasered-over-iphone-shopping-debacle-43768/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops,missed this. They weren't even cops. They were mall security .Rent a cop ,is not a police man .

Security should not have weapons of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by his waist line and that terrible haircut Sakari is a cop which explains why he is so adamant on defendeing the use of tazers. There I insulted you so you win, plus I couldn't resist :gun: . Hats off to you having the gut(s) to show what you look like bare torsoed sir.

In my opinion that video of the DUI is the exact reason that tazers were invented and that was the exact appropriate way to use them. Once someone is handcuffed there is no reason to risk running electrical current through them especially some drunken old lady, who technically (and yes this is weak) she is breaking the law due to a disease, alcoholism.

Also must add that simbi is 100% correct, my uncle, who is only 3 years older than me, when he first became a cop demonstrated to me how he could control me with my thumb. (we used to rough house alot) :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Security should not have weapons of any kind.

I saw it on the news this morning . The news said it was mall security .The article is saying its the cops .

The news vid showed her bein tazed to the ground ..

Wtf,emergency broadcast .elementary school shooting...

Where ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by his waist line and that terrible haircut Sakari is a cop which explains why he is so adamant on defendeing the use of tazers. There I insulted you so you win, plus I couldn't resist :gun: . Hats off to you having the gut(s) to show what you look like bare torsoed sir.

In my opinion that video of the DUI is the exact reason that tazers were invented and that was the exact appropriate way to use them. Once someone is handcuffed there is no reason to risk running electrical current through them especially some drunken old lady, who technically (and yes this is weak) she is breaking the law due to a disease, alcoholism.

Also must add that simbi is 100% correct, my uncle, who is only 3 years older than me, when he first became a cop demonstrated to me how he could control me with my thumb. (we used to rough house alot) :tu:

Since you enjoy looking at me so much, I thought I should share a pic with you that is more current,( and how I have looked for 15 years 99% of the time ) and not as bad. I do not have hair, and I sure the hell do not look like a cop. But hey, I could care less what people think about how I look, although you seem to like it, so here ya go :)

And your right, that picture makes me look fat, and for that I will change it back to just Sakari...Poor girl does not need some fat slob next to her.

post-92206-0-47810200-1355501699_thumb.j

Edited by Sakari
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, I have no sympathy at all for people who break the law. There are consequences, and we all know it.( even my son who spent 6 years in Prison )

As a matter of fact, if we ( the USA ) were more strict with breaking laws, maybe our crime would not be so high.

41589_160809730621201_743436_n.jpg

Or, the pussification of cops! Why can't a 180 - 200 pound cop take down a woman? Especially the elderly woman that was pulled over awhile back, or the eighteen year old girl that was tazed and then fell and died.

This woman was already cuffed! This is the kind of cop that gives cops a bad name. I would bet he's a jerk off duty as well....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you enjoy looking at me so much, I thought I should share a pic with you that is more current,( and how I have looked for 15 years 99% of the time ) and not as bad. I do not have hair, and I sure the hell do not look like a cop. But hey, I could care less what people think about how I look, although you seem to like it, so here ya go :)

And your right, that picture makes me look fat, and for that I will change it back to just Sakari...Poor girl does not need some fat slob next to her.

dude ....is it me,or is there some sort of skull face in your photo ,right next to your motorcycle .

****,throw some holy water on it .

You know what they say,there are two kinds of motorcycles .

The ones that have had an accident ,and the ones that are going to have an accident .

SSeriously .there an apparition in the pic. Unless you out it there .lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude ....is it me,or is there some sort of skull face in your photo ,right next to your motorcycle .

****,throw some holy water on it .

You know what they say,there are two kinds of motorcycles .

The ones that have had an accident ,and the ones that are going to have an accident .

SSeriously .there an apparition in the pic. Unless you out it there .lol

Yes Simbi, there is a " ORB " there :)

I had 3 bikes through the years, for the last 2 years been bikeless......Sucks.

As long as you are very defensive, and pay attention to what others are doing, and thinking ahead, you are fine....Been in one accident.

God I miss riding.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they don't, some people just think their rights are more then what they are. The 1st amendment does not give you the right to do and say what ever you want. The 4th amendment does not give you the right to resisted arrest. And the 5th amendment does not give you the right to not answer police when they question you.

Well I'll have to defer to your defense to this very reply. I never said that.

But what you're suggesting here is that Americans don't exercise their 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, or 5th Amendment rights? That's an incredible statement and I seriously doubt you actually believe that.

I do have the right not to answer police when they question me. I don't have the right to lie to them, or any other monkey business that isn't covered by the 5th (see your reply to me for more), but in stating what you think is the law, you got that one wrong. The 4th amendment has nothing to do with resisting arrest; it has plenty to do with resisting search and seizure. The first Amendment exists to protect controversial and unpopular statements; not uncontroversial and popular ones that don't need protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actualy thats exactly what the 5th gives you the right to do.

yes, corrcet.and also according to the video, and how it is in court, if you are proven wrong once, everything else you said, even truth, wont matter.

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'll have to defer to your defense to this very reply. I never said that.

But what you're suggesting here is that Americans don't exercise their 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, or 5th Amendment rights? That's an incredible statement and I seriously doubt you actually believe that.

I do have the right not to answer police when they question me. I don't have the right to lie to them, or any other monkey business that isn't covered by the 5th (see your reply to me for more), but in stating what you think is the law, you got that one wrong. The 4th amendment has nothing to do with resisting arrest; it has plenty to do with resisting search and The 4th amendment has nothing to do with resisting arrest. The first Amendment exists to protect controversial and unpopular statements; not uncontroversial and popular ones that don't need protection.

I know you did not, my point is some people break the law and think the amendments protect them.

No, I'm suggesting that Americans don't understand their Amendment rights.

If you're out in public and you do something and police come up to you to ask question about why you're doing what you're doing, you have to cooperate with them. You can’t ignore them and say nothing. That’s what I meant.

I know the 4th amendment has nothing to do with resisting arrest, but that’s my point. In too many videos, I see people walking away or jerking away from police trying to question them. Then when the police take them down other people start screaming about false arrest, its not.

All I meant with the 1st amendment is that you can’t obstruct traffic, yell fire at the movies, or things like that, yet some people think you can.

Edited by Odin11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.