- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 11,655
- Reaction score
- 3,612
- Location
- WA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Man.. I wish this site had an "unlike" button. You are overplaying The Fool card. Makes you look bad when you are willing to bend your neck that far just to see what you want to view.Right...because tazering people is what the Nazis are known for........:lamo:
Man.. I wish this site had an "unlike" button. You are overplaying The Fool card. Makes you look bad when you are willing to bend your neck that far just to see what you want to view.
She had his name. The dogs ended up leashed. All she had to do was follow him to his car and get the license plate n BOOM ticket confirmed. Instead he ended up on the ground (no longer walking away) saying, "Please dont taze me. I have a bad heart." when she lit him up. (according to an eye witness).
Id say a person groveling on their back and begging verbaly = compliance and she tazed him anyways. Unless the guy was comming at her getting ready to attack and the witness is phony included in some consipiracy.... She tazed him because she was angry and didnt like his attitude. Thats not what tazers are for. I hope this guy becomes a few hundred dollars richer because of this.
Follow him to the car, where he may or may not have a weapon concealed. Not light him up because he may have a heart condition. You really have no clue on self-defense, do you? As the Golden Rule should read: Do unto others BEFORE they do unto you.
Good for her. You're right that's not what tazers are for. That's what the steel baton is for. Make a REAL impression for a couple months until his leg gets out of the cast from that shattered kneecap.
1864/1872. So far as I'm concerned the very latest date one could consider "The Good Olde Days" would be the day BEFORE the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860.
Right... Someone on their back and pleading = baton beating....
The dude releashed his dogs. All she had to do was awnser his question on as to if she was going to cite him or not. You dont just hold people there and hope they do something further incriminating so that you can ramp up your use of force.
The guy was no longer walking away when she tazed him. Case closed.
"self defense" arguement??? Wooooow. Thats a retarded route to take. The only reason why i brought up "follow him to his car" was for further identification to back up the name he gave her. But to inject "He could have shot her with a gun" over a leash dispute is just petty. Especially seeing as the guy never once showed signs of agression. She did not taze him in self defense. She did it for compliance. This has already been established buddy.
I'm against her having shocked him into that position to begin with. I'd have gone straight for the baton, thus ensuring he couldn't walk away.
They shouldn't have been off the leash to begin with. At that point, he loses all sympathy from me.
Doesn't matter in my mind. The moment he does not comply 100% and immediately with her commands he loses all sympathy from me.
Unfortunately that sort of thing happens to LEO's all the time. That's why they generally don't all you to go back into your car/house/bag for something.... They can't be sure of what you're reaching for.
As for compliance... that's fine with me.
So with millions of LEO's, you can't even come up with more examples than I could count on one hand
You only proved my point that the prosecution of cops who fire on fleeing suspects is rare
(Note: Your such a fail at this debate that you don't even realize that at least one of those examples have nothing to do with a suspect who is fleeing) :lamo
they also have to be very good at keeping picnic baskets from bear duo's
This makes me wonder why park rangers need to carry tasers.
LOL! And I bet a lot of people don't know the reference ...Come on you have to get it right.
They are pic-a-nic baskets
Well, it does seem excessive. But what should she have done to detain him? Or should she have just let him go? We are a nation that lives by the rule of law. If a copper detains you, you listen. If you don't? Well, I guess sometimes you get tazed. No sympathy here.
arrested on suspicion of failing to obey a lawful order, having dogs off-leash and knowingly providing false information,
Do you really think that was all he could come up with? Or perhaps because those were recent, they took up the most space on google because they were big news?
He provided you 3 instances and you tell him he needs to provide more? Is this like simon says? Because you didn't simon says.
Police get in trouble pretty frequently, but it doesn't make the news usually.
Three instances does not prove that such prosecutions are not rare. There have been more than three cojoined twins, but they are considered "rare"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?