London police to boycott plans for more taser-guns
- Thread starter Facial_King
- Start date
Facetious
Moderated
The highly reserved, sensible, restrained and judicious use of tasers provide law enforcement officials with a secondary, more preferable and *non lethal, (usually), means with which to counter an uncooperative, advancing and potentially life threatening suspect.
Not to be a contrarian here, because I'm well aware of the abuses that take place in the use, or over use, as it were, of tasers.
In the realm of street police work, any suspect who grasps a potentially deadly device, a knife, claw hammer, awl, screwdriver, or firearm, for that matter, and for whatever reason, be it due to drunkeness , drugs or other, continues to advance his travel toward law enforcement officials, against repeated requests to cease his travel (stop / freeze) is a candidate for death by cop.
The cops have the legal authority to stop the suspect, so long as said suspect carries anything deemed to be a potentially deadly weapon.
You've heard all about "Death By Cop" haven't you ? This scenario is a perfect application for a tazer. and don't think for one minute that said scenario is rare.
Tazers have preserved the lives of previously unwise perpetrators. Again, it's either a .40 cal. center mass or a low ampere, high volt drop.
All in all, I believe that the taser should be used . . . and only used . . in the gravest of extremes ! Not to squelch screaming 14 y/o girls or people of foreign tongue that might be acting quarrelsome.
Heavy fines and / or termination should be levied against cops that abuse the services of the device.
^ *as compared to an officer's Speer Gold Dot 165 Grain 40 S & W in the center torso.
Not to be a contrarian here, because I'm well aware of the abuses that take place in the use, or over use, as it were, of tasers.
In the realm of street police work, any suspect who grasps a potentially deadly device, a knife, claw hammer, awl, screwdriver, or firearm, for that matter, and for whatever reason, be it due to drunkeness , drugs or other, continues to advance his travel toward law enforcement officials, against repeated requests to cease his travel (stop / freeze) is a candidate for death by cop.
The cops have the legal authority to stop the suspect, so long as said suspect carries anything deemed to be a potentially deadly weapon.
You've heard all about "Death By Cop" haven't you ? This scenario is a perfect application for a tazer. and don't think for one minute that said scenario is rare.
Tazers have preserved the lives of previously unwise perpetrators. Again, it's either a .40 cal. center mass or a low ampere, high volt drop.
All in all, I believe that the taser should be used . . . and only used . . in the gravest of extremes ! Not to squelch screaming 14 y/o girls or people of foreign tongue that might be acting quarrelsome.
Heavy fines and / or termination should be levied against cops that abuse the services of the device.
^ *as compared to an officer's Speer Gold Dot 165 Grain 40 S & W in the center torso.
Transfer all of our ghettos, druggies, and gang bangers, over there and I bet the cops change there tune quickly.
^ The last two posts (by D-rock and Facetious) have nicely summed up just about everything I have to say on the subject.
I think people forget that while tasers are sometimes misused by police officers in the US, they are often a much preferable alternative to guns. Anyone who has been tased by a police officer where the alternative would have been to be shot, may well owe their life to that officer and his use of a taser. Then again, those are the cases we never hear of, part of the 99% where everything works out the way it should.
I think that officers must not use tasers for convenience sake or in anger. They should be used judiciously just like firearms.
I think people forget that while tasers are sometimes misused by police officers in the US, they are often a much preferable alternative to guns. Anyone who has been tased by a police officer where the alternative would have been to be shot, may well owe their life to that officer and his use of a taser. Then again, those are the cases we never hear of, part of the 99% where everything works out the way it should.
I think that officers must not use tasers for convenience sake or in anger. They should be used judiciously just like firearms.
yeah, rural Montana is a dangerous place.
MossSide Manchester also a dangerous place
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
No, we're a lot safer. Gun density over here is very low. I can't think of anyone in my area, or friends who has a gun license or even a member of a gun club.
I could walk out into the street now, punch 30 people at random, and be confident that none of them will have a gun - well, at least I hope. I won't test it as I'd be more likely to get stabbed, but least not shot, so I have a very good chance
Not where I live
Although punching 30 people for no good reason, sounds like the start of a good old riot, there havent been many of them in a while. Maggie come back :wave: we need more riots!!!
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
Not where I live
Although punhing 30 people for no good reason, sounds like the start of a good old riot, there havent been many of them in a while. Maggie come back :wave: we need more riots!!!
If only it was "punning" 30 people. Going upto people and just using as many puns as you can before they try and take a swing at you. Might try that tomorrow night.
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
The taser guns were supposed to be a non-lethal alternative.
Obviously they are not and they have been misused.
It's time to discontinue using them in every country.
Obviously they are not and they have been misused.
It's time to discontinue using them in every country.
:nanner: Saved by the edit :nanner:
Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It is already tomorrow in Australia. (Zing)
Christmas dinner is a place where you can really talk turkey(.....errr...zing :dunno
Did you hear about the guy whose whole left side was cut off? He's all right now. (Thats just shit! )
You say those take my word for it, you'll wake up bahind a Chinese resturant covered in chicken chow mein with 6 and a half teeth left. :hatsoff:
Skyraider22
The One and Only Big Daddy
Well put ....:glugglug:
that's not comparable at all. Police in England don't have gang bangers firing at them with automatic weapons. the US police need all the gear they can get.
Although it can be argued that British Police don't get fired at by criminals with automatic weapons often because the normal every day bobby isn't armed and so, that filters down and the everyday criminal doesn't feel the overwhelming urge to carry and use automatic weapons either.
Just the other side of the coin.
Facetious
Moderated
Are you inferring that the individuals who have followed the law to the degree that they would actually be granted "permission" to obtain and operate such firearms is inherently an unsafe person ? To the contrary, if so. To the contrary. The legal firearm owner, at least the one's that I enjoy being in the company of, are the squeakiest of clean, most responsible individuals that I know, the same people that you would entrust to take your 14 year old daughter quail hunting in the mountains for the day ! I can't say the same for dick cheney !! :tongue: lol !
Seriously, You do understand that a fractional minority of legal firearm owners do not possess, nor wish to possess the required State Concealed Carry Permit ? In the state of which I reside, Calif., personal, on person, carry permits are nearly forbidden. That's OK with me because I live in an historically safe area. There are areas that, if I were somehow forced to live, my life would certainly be in much greater danger, not due to thugs with guns, but due to gangs with knives ! Fortunately, for me, I need not frequent such potentially threatening and dangerous areas where an individual is likely to test punch "30 people at random"
but you never know. You nev' er know.Stabbed . . . Shot, Shot . . Stabbed . . . I don't know that there's a general "preference" or equal. A knife wielding burglar may legally be shot (and killed), for example, under the roof of a legal firearms owner, provided that said occupant can provide evidence that said intruder, was, in fact, knife bearing.
It's all such good fun to worry about firearms when cancer and or the effects of such "global heating" or cooling, as it were, will be our likely killers
That, aformentioned, smart ass comment wasn't for you, Shag. I mean that .
Just throwing it out there.
Similar threads
