The Seeker wrote:Lox wrote:Well, it's easy for you to make that judgement when you a) aren't a trained police officer and b) weren't there as it was happening. The truth is that you have no idea whether she could have become a threat. If she had, then everyone would have said "why didn't the officer do something before she shot him?" But, there's obviously no way that you, Seeker, could possibly just be making a moronic statement without any idea what you're talking about. Never.
There is nothing moronic about my statement. You are only suggesting that because you somehow find it impossible to accept any other point of view no matter how logical it is. Before you even question the validity of my statements, look at you own, you suggest that the cop was in danger of being shot; as I recall from the video, there was no such indication that the officer was in danger at all; the woman made no motions which would threaten the well being of the officer, and even if she did, there would be no way that she would be able to reach for a fun, pull it out, aim, and shoot with an officer pointing a stun gun at her. In fact, I would argue that your last statement is mornonic, because now you are just pulling out ridiculous stories to try and prove your point that she deserved to be blasted with a taser.
Now let me bring up a possibility that is quite less ridiculous than your gun slinging woman scenario. What if she had been pregnant? Do you know what the effects of 50,000 volts being fired into your body would have on a developing child? Tasers have also been said to cause lasting damage on the individual. They are incredibly painful, the shock is powerful enough to cause all of the muscles in the body to spasm erratically to the point where the person is essentially paralyzed; a paralyzing shock is how powerful 50,000 volts, quite painful. What if the person had a pace maker? Tasers are dangerous, potentially lethal, weapons (and yes, people have died from being shot by them before).
Lox wrote:Turning this into a race-issue is just a lame way to ignore the facts of her resisting arrest and acting irresponsibly and deserving what she got.
No it isn't, first of all, she did not deserve what she got, you have been the one ignoring the facts. Second of all, her race IS one of the facts in this specific case due to the unfair treatment of blacks by cops in parts of the US.
Lastly, there were many other options available besides blasting her with the taser. She had pulled over, the woman was obviously terribly frightened, especially when the policeman pulled out what she thought was a gun at her. She was freaking out, the officer did not give her any time to calm down, which he should have. There was no reason to blast her with a taser, she did not make any motions that would suggest that she was putting anyone in danger, or that she was going to try to escape. The officer was careless and impatient, and very very quick to use violence, much much quicker than the officers on the show "Cops" for example. Only on cops they don't use any form of violence unless it is to prevent someone from getting away, or if they become violently threatening themselves.
PS. Sine, you did poor research:
What are the benefits of stun guns?
Tasers are supposed to allow police officers to subdue violent individuals without killing them. A police officer can "take down" a threatening suspect without worrying that a stray bullet might kill or injure an innocent bystander.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/tasers/
This link seems to work entirely against everything you just said. >_>
The company says there are none. Critics argue that there hasn't been enough research into the safety of stun guns. They point to the deaths since 2001 of more than 50 people in North America after Taser shocks.
On its website, the company argues that not one of those deaths has been directly attributed to a shot from a Taser:
"The fact is that TASER devices have never been named as the primary cause of death in any in custody death, and any links as a contributing factor are subjective and unsupported by clear evidence."
The company notes that 100,000 police officers have volunteered to take hits from Taser weapons – with no deaths.
In 1989, a Canadian study found that stun guns induced heart attacks in pigs with pacemakers. Ten years later, an American study concluded that weapons delivering a jolt weaker than Tasers increased the risk of cardiac arrest in people with heart conditions.
So far, no autopsy report from a death that followed an altercation with police that included a shot from a Taser has concluded that the Taser caused the death.
What's the Canadian perspective?
Canadian police say Tasers have saved 4,000 lives since police forces started using them in this country in 1999.
Still, Staff Sgt. Peter Sherstan, of the RCMP's Emergency Response Team in Edmonton, says Tasers should not be considered non-lethal.
"The RCMP's position is that Tasers are a less-lethal alternative," Sherstan told CBC Radio. "There are still risks. There could be a situation where a person hit with a Taser shot could fall and hit his head. But we have to balance that out. We have several cases where if Tasers weren't present, guns would have been the alternative."
Amnesty International Canada has been calling for a suspension in the use of Tasers until studies can determine how they can be safely used.
"Obviously police should be using non-lethal alternatives," Alex Neve, the organization's secretary general, said. "But the standards say those non-lethal alternatives should be fully investigated. We need to have a study, we need to understand what those risks are."
Neve says tests on police and members of the military may have gone well, but he notes they're among the fittest people around and not likely to suffer adverse reactions to a Taser shot. Studies, he says, have suggested that people who abuse drugs or who have heart conditions could be at risk.
Amnesty International also worries that officers might be tempted to use weapons like Tasers too often if they believe they're not lethal. Sherstan argues that shouldn't be an issue if officers are properly trained in their use.
The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police has asked the Canadian Police Research Centre to thoroughly review scientific research, field reports and data on the use of Tasers in police work in Canada and around the world.
The CPRC says the goal of the study is to correlate existing research on Tasers with field experience, giving police forces more information on how to properly use them.
