arnoha
New member
Are you going to add anything useful to this thread, or just troll it?
-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
Taser use correct? What do you think?
- Thread starter Warrior Princess
- Start date
Are you going to add anything useful to this thread, or just troll it?
SurfAwave69
Active member
I'm citing an incident where use of force with a taser was used and can add insight to this particular situation. I knew someone would get butthurt......how about countering my statement with something better than the normal 'trolling' bullshit. Use your brain and start a conversation, a healthy debate.
http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266930&highlight=taser+york
Last edited:
arnoha
New member
I'm citing an incident where use of force with a taser was used and can add insight to this particular situation. I knew someone would get butthurt......how about countering my statement with something better than the normal 'trolling' bullshit.
Fine. Your post has no content. You've added nothing material to the thread, except to try to light a debate that isn't there. You've provided no additional data, no additional numbers, no links, nothing to back up a wild claim about increased taser use. You reference one well-known incident that was discussed to death already. A single incident. That does not make a trend.
What I'd like to see is data to back up your claim. Show me that there are more taser uses per taser deployed lately and I'll take you seriously. But you don't have any. Just anecdotal evidence, which is worthless.
You're throwing out an anti-cop bias that you attempt to legitimize using facts you've made up. Show me that there are more taser uses per hour they sit on a belt lately, and I'll be duly mortified. Outside that, what you're doing is trolling.
EDIT: Let me add something to that. Yeah, I'm annoyed. But it actually has nothing to do with the issue of tasers. Perhaps you're bearing the brunt of it, since you do it in the LEO forum, where I expect a little more decorum, than, say, in the Sink. I've noted a lot of people throwing stuff out just to be argumentative. Argumentative is not a debate. Cut-and-pasting a news article is rarely adding anything to a forum. Add something of yourself when you do this...a well thought-out opinion, perhaps. Maybe a personal involvement in the story. Something. Just saying, "Hey, this happened!", is just muckraking.
Last edited:
SurfAwave69
Active member
EDIT: The ACLU loves you.......http://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/police_practices/asset_upload_file389_5242.pdf
anti-cop bias?? Made up?? Talk about trumped up charges...
It's called current events.......Read a paper...turn on the news....
http://www.ktvu.com/video/18704681/index.html
http://www.ktvu.com/video/18364420/index.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...AM415U05P.DTL&hw=san+jose+taser&sn=002&sc=883
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...5/state/n051502S10.DTL&hw=taser&sn=004&sc=315
and concerning what I was talking about before...last time I linked to the particular story, the thread got locked because the cop whom ordered the taser to be fired comitted suicide; so, I would post a link, but it would get deleted.
EDIT: Reason for posting in the LEO forum is a chance to get information and some insight from the people who actually use them....this is a forum to have healthy discussions...maybe learn a thing or two eh?
anti-cop bias?? Made up?? Talk about trumped up charges...
It's called current events.......Read a paper...turn on the news....
http://www.ktvu.com/video/18704681/index.html
http://www.ktvu.com/video/18364420/index.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...AM415U05P.DTL&hw=san+jose+taser&sn=002&sc=883
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...5/state/n051502S10.DTL&hw=taser&sn=004&sc=315
and concerning what I was talking about before...last time I linked to the particular story, the thread got locked because the cop whom ordered the taser to be fired comitted suicide; so, I would post a link, but it would get deleted.
EDIT: Reason for posting in the LEO forum is a chance to get information and some insight from the people who actually use them....this is a forum to have healthy discussions...maybe learn a thing or two eh?
Last edited:
arnoha
New member
That's MUCH better. If you'd done that with the first post, you might have gotten a little more respect.
I will grant you that I threw out the anti-cop bias bit without support. I don't particularly feel like researching right now, and, for that, I apologize. You are correct...I violated my own standard. I'm sorry.
On the other hand, the news articles you have linked are not useful. They report incidents, not trends. If it were a news article on a study done on taser use, it be would relevant. Pointing out incidents only shows that an outcome is possible. It says nothing about its likelihood or about the frequency.
There is debate going on on BARF about whether taser use causes death. These could be talking points in a debate about that. But they're not useful by themselves on a debate about trends because they don't talk about trends. They're about specific incidents.
Last edited:
arnoha
New member
*sigh* I'm an idiot. I apologize for a comment I made when the evidence I was looking for was one thread down.
Some evidence for my claim that you have an anti-cop bias: http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283715
Some evidence for my claim that you have an anti-cop bias: http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283715
SurfAwave69
Active member
Shaggy
Zoinks!!!!
I'm citing an incident where use of force with a taser was used and can add insight to this particular situation. I knew someone would get butthurt......how about countering my statement with something better than the normal 'trolling' bullshit. Use your brain and start a conversation, a healthy debate.
This incident in New York didn't go as smoothly as you might think. You may not be aware, but the Lieutenant who ordered the use of the taser in that situation took his own life shortly after the incident.
In my opinion, the taser is just the "hot button" issue right now. The taser delivers incapacitating shocks for 5 seconds and then everything is back to normal. The suspect doesn't feel any more pain. With the alternatives being impact weapons (causing deeply bruised tissue and broken bones), OC spray (pain for 30+ minutes), or pain compliance techniques (possible broken bones, strains, etc...). All these happen far more frequently that you'd like to imagine. The world police deal with isn't pretty.
If you're sincerely interested in the debate, try both taser and OC and let us know which you prefer. Remember, most officers are exposed to the methods before being authorized to use them.
Just some food for thought instead of the typical Monday morning quarterback BS.
SurfAwave69
Active member
You've Failed....http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266930&highlight=taser+york
You need to read all the posts before posting...
Read post #85
Last edited:
arnoha
New member
Sorry, it's you who have failed. I'm still waiting on any evidence from you that there has been trend towards increasing unjustified taser use.
To help you out, I did a little looking myself. I found one study that applies, by UCSF in the American Journal of Cardiology. http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=13b115e1aefc6f2654e19cd7083a4a3a
Unfortunately, you have to pay for the full article. I'm not willing to fork over $32 at the moment. Given your job, you should have ready access to the whole thing, as any news outlet should have subscriptions to this stuff. Could you grab the whole thing for us? Here's the abstract:
It's an interesting study in comparison to your claim. It basically claims the exact opposite of the trend you claim. It claims that the first year they're deployed, there's teething pains, but after that all goes back to normal. However, it's not a complete match: you were talking about justification on use and this study is talking about injuries.
It's a small study and not entirely conclusive. I'd really like to see the whole article to see how the numbers really play out, since the result is not intuitive to me. It's final claim is that tasers are currently ineffective, which is a surprising claim and contrary to what I would have expected.
Last edited:
SurfAwave69
Active member
arnoha
New member
Okay, we're getting closer. We just need one more piece of data to make the chart you showed relevant to the conversation, and that's how many tasers were deployed. There's a trending graph in the lower right corner, but it fails to take into account that over that period is when tasers were being deployed in large numbers. A graph on taser deployment would allow us to determine if the trend is really up or down.
Also, I see that's from the Seattle Post, but could you provide a full link to the article? I can't reference it if I only get a picture.
SurfAwave69
Active member
I gift-wrapped it for you:
http://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/police_practices/asset_upload_file389_5242.pdf
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/health&id=6620623
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/24-3
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/587624
http://cbs5.com/crime/santa.rosa.taser.2.892647.html
http://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/police_practices/asset_upload_file389_5242.pdf
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/health&id=6620623
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/24-3
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/587624
http://cbs5.com/crime/santa.rosa.taser.2.892647.html
Last edited:
LongGoneJohn
Gone
SurfAwave:
The ACLU repeatedly talks about lack of guidelines for Taser training.
To carry a Taser in the State of California, as a police officer, you have to attend and pass a P.O.S.T approved Taser course. P.O.S.T is the governing agency that, wait for it, governs training and provides guidelines for all departments in California to use!
Taser training is a part of this, just as is firearms, sexual harassment, search and seizure, and nearly every other aspect of police work in California. In short, there are state-mandated guidelines that officers have to complete prior to carrying Tasers, in California.
Reading something from the ACLU is like reading hieroglyphics without the Rosetta stone. It's just stupid.
The ACLU repeatedly talks about lack of guidelines for Taser training.
To carry a Taser in the State of California, as a police officer, you have to attend and pass a P.O.S.T approved Taser course. P.O.S.T is the governing agency that, wait for it, governs training and provides guidelines for all departments in California to use!
Taser training is a part of this, just as is firearms, sexual harassment, search and seizure, and nearly every other aspect of police work in California. In short, there are state-mandated guidelines that officers have to complete prior to carrying Tasers, in California.
Reading something from the ACLU is like reading hieroglyphics without the Rosetta stone. It's just stupid.
arnoha
New member
Okay, I'll have to read the ACLU opinion piece in more detail before I can form an opinion on it.
The three middle links are all news articles on the study I already listed. You realize that that study is evidence against your claim, not for it?
The last link is just another incident. It's not relevant by itself.
We're straying from the original intent of your claim, that there's been an increase in unjustified use of the taser towards a different argument about the taser's effectiveness and safety. That's fine by me, as it's also a valid debate, but let's realize we're doing that.
SurfAwave69
Active member
To go back to the reason this thread was started, my point is that the officer used poor judgement (and it seems as though if this happened in SJ, it would be poor judgement: http://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/police_practices/asset_upload_file372_3135.pdf). I understand why the man is angry and going all the way to the supreme court....
Last edited:
arnoha
New member
I haven't yet read the ACLU article...it's long and I don't have the time at the moment. I'll do it later. However, I wouldn't go so far as to condemn the ACLU. They may be a bit extreme at times and you may not always agree with their opinions (I certainly don't), but I think the existence of organizations like them is an important piece of the structure of our society. By pulling a little too hard to one side, they pull the actual outcome closer to the center where it probably belongs. Sure, sometimes it doesn't always work, but the end result is usually a good one in the long term. As best as I can tell, they're not bad people. They walk the walk for their talk and their arguments are usually reasoned. (Unlike, say, PETA, which appears to be horribly hypocritical.) For instance, they have no hesitation about defending a police officer when he's in trouble on one of the issues for which they make a stand.
The other nice thing about that article is the 120 references at the end! That's awesome...because that's your Rosetta Stone. That'll tell you exactly how they came to the opinion they did and allow you to form your own, independent of the prose in the opinion piece.
So, no I'm not a card-toting ACLU member, but I do think they serve an important purpose.
EDIT: Oh, and the talk at your point directly for a moment...no I still haven't read the article. But I do note it's from 2005, which means the data for it is 2004 or older. That means that tasers had only been in use for a few years. When did the effective training for tasers come out? Was it after or concurrent with the data for this article? I don't know yet...gotta look into it.
Last edited:
LongGoneJohn
Gone
I'm 99.9999% sure that Taser had to get its cirriculumn for training / guidelines approved by P.O.S.T before departments would purchase the weapon and train the personnel.
taranis
New member
Just finished reading the whole thread.
Here is my 2c.
But first: This thread is not a court of LAW so to all the people requiring that we be experts in the use and polices of Tazers to express an opinion in this thread.... STHU. I am using conjecture and hearsay to make my point. It's a forum and the last I checked one does NOT need to be a LEO, lawyer or P.O.S.T. expert to express an opinion here.
The hot button issue seems to be the perception that the suspect was passively resisting and does not APPEAR to be threat to the officer when he received multiple tazer attacks. And that the officer had a 'do as I tell you or you get tazed' attitude.
The augments in favor (while most said they would not choose to use a tazer in this situation) were that it is technically legal to use a tazer on an arrested subject as an escalation point for non compliance. Also some questioned the argument that the suspect was not a threat to himself or the officer.
My 2c:
The suspect seems to be emotionally disturbed and needed medical help not a tazer. The ambulance should have been called. Not saying he would get a walk on the ticket or the arrest though.
Here is my 2c.
But first: This thread is not a court of LAW so to all the people requiring that we be experts in the use and polices of Tazers to express an opinion in this thread.... STHU. I am using conjecture and hearsay to make my point. It's a forum and the last I checked one does NOT need to be a LEO, lawyer or P.O.S.T. expert to express an opinion here.
The hot button issue seems to be the perception that the suspect was passively resisting and does not APPEAR to be threat to the officer when he received multiple tazer attacks. And that the officer had a 'do as I tell you or you get tazed' attitude.
The augments in favor (while most said they would not choose to use a tazer in this situation) were that it is technically legal to use a tazer on an arrested subject as an escalation point for non compliance. Also some questioned the argument that the suspect was not a threat to himself or the officer.
My 2c:
The suspect seems to be emotionally disturbed and needed medical help not a tazer. The ambulance should have been called. Not saying he would get a walk on the ticket or the arrest though.
Last edited: