• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Phillies Fan Tasered - Good Move or Bad Move?

Phillies Fan Tasered - Good Move or Bad Move?

  • Good Move Jolt him!

    Votes: 26 65.0%
  • Bad Move He Caused No Harm!

    Votes: 11 27.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 7.5%

  • Total voters
    40

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,568
Reaction score
49,820
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Philidelphia sports fans are savages. :lamo

Beyond savages...downright animals. Bunch of Phillies fans beat some dude to death outside a bar during his bachelors party because there was some dumbass altercation. Brotherly love my ass; those jackasses will stab you with no cause and leave you bleeding to death in the streets. Philadelphia is a hellhole full of barbaric animals and sub-humans.
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I played **** tons of backyard tackle ball. I guess I should have used a tazer eh? I mean, it's safer than tackling and I'm not a professional athlete with lots of expensive equipment. So it should have been better for me to use a tazer instead. So we should give our kids tazers when they go out to play tackle football. I mean...it's safer for everyone involved, right?
As long as everyone agrees to what they're getting into, I have no issue with it either way. /shrug

No I didn't bring up safety issues, that was you. I said it was best to just tackle the guy.
I'll admit I may have cross-pollinated your post with another, but I was responding to the following in your post:

No one was going to get hurt, what the **** is the guy gonna do?

So are you ok with little kids using tazers during pickup tackle football games?
Parent and children agree to it, why not?

You see in the end the "safety" arguments of all flavors are bull**** arguments that don't pan out to reality. We have to ask, why was he tazered? For trespassing during an social entertainment event which he paid to get into. Perhaps in that case, tazering is not all the called for. Especially when the guy is outnumbered and chased down. Just tackle the guy. No more of these BS excuses over "safety". Fact is this has happened numerous times before, it will happen numerous times later. And this is one of the very rare, few cases in which the guy running on the field wasn't tackled. And guess what? Not a bunch of people getting hurt, no players getting thrown on DL because of it, etc. So let's take this for what it is and not go into absurd hyperbole to try to excuse the actions of the police state. Tazering was not necessary.
Tazering stopped him quickly without harming anyone. Problem solved. That there may have been other ways to solve the situation doesn't negate the fact that the way it was handled was successful, not harmful, and efficient.

Maybe pansy-asses shouldn't run onto the field.
 

Dezaad

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Messages
5,057
Reaction score
2,424
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Let's look at the facts:

1. Kid is running around in a CLOSED field.
2. Six guys are chasing him.
3. The human body tires after strenuous activity.

Unnecessary.

That guys been waiting three years to use that taser and finally goes "Oh snap I finally get to use this thing! :mrgreen:"

Could be. Still, I have no sympathy for the kid. Do something stupid, sometimes you get tasered for it. Too bad.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,359
Reaction score
7,218
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Does every instance of breaking the law require a taser? In my opinion, no. There were 6 guys dealing with this stupid kid... ample enough bodies to tackle him and get him off the field before any damage was done. Listen, these on-filed shenanigans have been done for over 50 years, and each instance was remedied without the use of a taser. I do not recall one instance where a player was hurt because of a streaker or some jerk delaying the game because of stupidity.


Another thing I dislike about the public is the stupidity of the number of officers dealing with someone.

6 officers = 6 more people to get injured if the incident got physical (fighting) and a tazer wasn't used.

6 officers = 6 times more likely to cause physical injury (something a tazer does not, except in freak accidents) during a physical confrontation.

Also, this argument stinks of an attitude that "Its the officers job to get hurt, the more officers the more we can afford to get hurt doing stuff the hard way"
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,359
Reaction score
7,218
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Now come on -- the cop had a perfectly good reason to tase the kid.

He was too fat and slow to catch him.


And you aren't?
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,359
Reaction score
7,218
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You see in the end the "safety" arguments of all flavors are bull**** arguments that don't pan out to reality. We have to ask, why was he tazered? For trespassing during an social entertainment event which he paid to get into. Perhaps in that case, tazering is not all the called for. Especially when the guy is outnumbered and chased down. Just tackle the guy. No more of these BS excuses over "safety". Fact is this has happened numerous times before, it will happen numerous times later. And this is one of the very rare, few cases in which the guy running on the field wasn't tackled. And guess what? Not a bunch of people getting hurt, no players getting thrown on DL because of it, etc. So let's take this for what it is and not go into absurd hyperbole to try to excuse the actions of the police state. Tazering was not necessary.

Ahh, the "outnumbered" argument again.

Its not a fair fight and isn't supposed to be.

But it doesn't matter if there is one, six, twelve, or twenty four officers (although by then they'd have a perimeter on the kid). The risk of injury is all the same regardless of how many officers are present if the confrontation gets physical.

Also, "why" doesn't really matter. If someone assaults an officers after a robbery, or after stealing a pack of bubble gum is all the same, they are both getting the tazer.


Now for the sake of morons and idiots I have to add a disclaimer that I already stated the use of the tazer was not necessary in this case, as he was only fleeing and not physically threatening or attacking officers. I just can't ****ing stand it when idiots talk about how many officers there are, as if the risks go away when more show up and the person still acts the same.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,359
Reaction score
7,218
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The gun can elicit response with gun. The knife...that would excuse the tazer, but not a gun. Well that would depend. But if the suspect is standing away from folk brandishing a gun, it's tazer excused. If he's lunging or within proximity of others it's gun excused.

No, sorry, if I used a knife on an offender, that would be considered lethal force.

Therefore, if an offender uses a knife on me, I use a gun.

One step ABOVE the offender.

Knifes kill people all the time, just ask your nearest mexican neighbor.
 

LiberalAvenger

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
16,881
Reaction score
2,980
Location
virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
True story... Devils flyers, NJ. Flyers devils fan get into a fight, on the bus ride home same fyers fan stabs another.



True Story.... Took my wife toa phantoms game when we were in philly, fight breaks out, 9 year old girls in 4h stashes start screaming "kill that mother****er" and other such vernaculars....



Philidelphia sports fans are savages. :lamo

That's cause they have alll of:( their teeth fighting at sports events, especially hockey matches.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,595
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The amount of hate for the city of brotherly love here is appalling. You should all be ashamed. The Phillies and Flyers don't deserve such bad mouthing though the Eagles should get all they can handle. To those who are Met fans I have one thing to say:

:2rofll:

Whens the last time you heard about an incident at Shea Stadium/Citi Field?? Oh wait thats right never, we know how to act like people unlike Philly.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,568
Reaction score
49,820
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
As long as everyone agrees to what they're getting into, I have no issue with it either way. /shrug

I don't quite disagree with that. However, using tazers instead of tackling is well more dangerous.

Parent and children agree to it, why not?

It's fine, but you'll end up doing well more damage than had you simply played tackle football.

Tazering stopped him quickly without harming anyone. Problem solved. That there may have been other ways to solve the situation doesn't negate the fact that the way it was handled was successful, not harmful, and efficient.

It is just as easy to tackle the guy. He's just some drunk r-tard. There was no reason to taze him.

Maybe pansy-asses shouldn't run onto the field.

Maybe pansy-asses shouldn't be cops.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,568
Reaction score
49,820
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Ahh, the "outnumbered" argument again.

Its not a fair fight and isn't supposed to be.

But it doesn't matter if there is one, six, twelve, or twenty four officers (although by then they'd have a perimeter on the kid). The risk of injury is all the same regardless of how many officers are present if the confrontation gets physical.

Maybe you can show me where I said it had to be a fair fight? Can you? No? That's right cause I didn't. So if you want to stop trying to assume things and go off of what is written, that would be great. kthanks. The point was that they didn't need to taze him. They had him chased down, they had him out numbered, a simple tackle would have sufficed.

Also, "why" doesn't really matter. If someone assaults an officers after a robbery, or after stealing a pack of bubble gum is all the same, they are both getting the tazer.

Why always matters. The State has presumption of guilt. They initiate force, they are suspect, they need to answer. Why is very important. Though not to anything which was being said. My point there was to put in perspective the act of tazering the guy and the reason for it. It wasn't assault he got tazed for, so please try to be consistent and honest. It was trespassing.

Now for the sake of morons and idiots I have to add a disclaimer that I already stated the use of the tazer was not necessary in this case, as he was only fleeing and not physically threatening or attacking officers. I just can't ****ing stand it when idiots talk about how many officers there are, as if the risks go away when more show up and the person still acts the same.

I can't stand when idiots can't read and the assume things which were not said so they can make a dumb ass rant about something which didn't exist. ****ing idiots.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,458
Reaction score
32,369
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Maybe you can show me where I said it had to be a fair fight? Can you? No? That's right cause I didn't. So if you want to stop trying to assume things and go off of what is written, that would be great. kthanks. The point was that they didn't need to taze him. They had him chased down, they had him out numbered, a simple tackle would have sufficed.



Why always matters. The State has presumption of guilt. They initiate force, they are suspect, they need to answer. Why is very important. Though not to anything which was being said. My point there was to put in perspective the act of tazering the guy and the reason for it. It wasn't assault he got tazed for, so please try to be consistent and honest. It was trespassing.



I can't stand when idiots can't read and the assume things which were not said so they can make a dumb ass rant about something which didn't exist. ****ing idiots.

You say simple tackle as if that wouldnt be more potential harmful to the tackle-er and the tackl-ee.

I had occasion last year to have to restrain an individual in an emergency room with a 'simple' manuever. Im in pretty damn good shape...but I dont practice 'tackle' manuevers as part of a fitness regime. As a result, I strained a tendon in my left forearm that caused me to be unable to carry anything without pain for 6 months. And thats WITH PT. and no...I didnt sue or claim workmans comp...

The other guy? I bruised his sternum pretty good...and that was a 'soft' takedown.

Tasing (after the initial shock) is more an embarassment than anything else. this kids epic faceplant failure will go into the annals of history for all to see. Bonus. For us I mean.

Lets review the events. Kid calls dad. Kid: Dad...Im going to run on the field. umm...no son...thats what we call a BAD idea. Kid: **** you dad, Im gonna do it anyway. Kid: look at me! Yay everyone look at me...Im a self important assho....WTF!!! Splat...

The only 'bad' part about the cop tasing him is he missed with the second wire.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Bad move for the kid: He got tasered.
Good news for the kid: All he got was tasered.

Found this part of the question interesting:
Bad Move He Caused No Harm!

He broke the law.
Do we have to wait until someone gets hurt? The same policy as Obama/Kerry has for national defense?

Just say'in.

.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
81,568
Reaction score
49,820
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Tasing (after the initial shock) is more an embarassment than anything else. this kids epic faceplant failure will go into the annals of history for all to see. Bonus. For us I mean.

Until it kills you. Plus cops should probably be trained in take down maneuvers. In fact, I'd be rather surprised if they weren't. I just think that tazering someone for trespassing is perhaps more response than is necessary.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,458
Reaction score
32,369
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Until it kills you. Plus cops should probably be trained in take down maneuvers. In fact, I'd be rather surprised if they weren't. I just think that tazering someone for trespassing is perhaps more response than is necessary.

My guess is that the 17 year old kid was healthy enough to jump onto the field and run around he is healthy enough to withstand being tased. And if not...hey...thats what paramedics are for.

Cops ARE trained in takedown maneuvers. THAT would have been far more violent. And again...fun to watch.

I respectfully disagree.

BTW...could have been far worse...

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jagvYIMJyzU"]YouTube- Guards that Beat Fan are then Beaten by More Fans[/nomedia]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibscinBPGC4&feature=related"]YouTube- football fan runs on field[/nomedia]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5e6WecwGIQ&feature=related"]YouTube- Streaker gets laid out[/nomedia]
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I think tasers are used much too quickly, usually by cops/security guys who are 30 lbs over weight. However, that kid deserved a good old fashioned ass whupping! His dad too! I understand he was sitting with his father actually discussing whether he should do this or not. So, who is more irresponsible, the kid or the dad, for not stopping him?

Over-reacting, extremism, over zealousness, hatred, fear, envy are the problems. Also laziness, sloth(the so-called parent.)..
A little tolerance can go a long way.
Why so much hatred for this poor child?
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I don't think they go far enough. This is Philly fans afterall, I agree that they need to be preemptively tasered once in a while. It can be named the "for the incidents we missed" ordinance.
 

barefootguy

New member
Joined
Aug 6, 2005
Messages
39
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
6 or 7 security guards against 1 drunk fan. Using a weapon such as a taser was completely unnecessary.
 

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,167
Reaction score
21,572
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
if you look at the err...girth...of the bloke that tasered him, it was probably better than getting tackled by him
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,458
Reaction score
32,369
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Over-reacting, extremism, over zealousness, hatred, fear, envy are the problems. Also laziness, sloth(the so-called parent.)..
A little tolerance can go a long way.
Why so much hatred for this poor child?

It wasnt but 100 years ago 15 year olds were routinely married, parenting children, building and running farms and business. And now...at 17 he is a 'poor child'. Behold...the pussification of America.
 

roguenuke

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
52,623
Reaction score
19,402
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I figure tasering him was probably a lot safer than tackling him.

Tackling someone who isn't wearing protective gear and/or hasn't physically trained to pretty much "take a hit" can result in a large amount of possible injuries, including broken bones, contusions, strained muscles, possible head injury, and could even cause internal bleeding if the tackler landed on the person wrong. And all those things could also happen to the tackler. And the more people that you have tackling someone, the more likely an injury will occur.

I don't think waiting it out would have worked well in this case, because it seemed like the kid was in better shape than the guards, and could have kept away from them for quite a while longer. Delaying the game because the guards didn't want to use a pretty safe method of stopping such a person could have easily caused complaints and cut into the profits of the park and/or ball club. Most of the spectators paid to see a baseball game, and even if the kid running around for a few minutes could have been considered an okay or even welcome pause of the game, eventually it would have gotten old, if it hadn't by the time they actually did stop him. People would have gotten restless and some probably would have gotten angry.

There might have been a better way to deal with the situation, but I can't think of any other way that would have ended it as quickly or more quickly and would have caused as little injury as tasing him did. Well maybe if the guards were in better shape, and could have actually caught him, but there's really no way to fix that problem while the situation is occurring.
 
Top Bottom