Dont Tase Me Bro!...

[Rider_of_Fast]

Being a news and current affairs junkie I couldnt help but notice the raging debate about the suitable use of Taser guns in Australia of late.

Also I thought Id dig up the past with a funny youtube vid of an American getting tasered at a Uni of Florida student forum gathering. Watching this vid brought me to tears with laughter - yes I am evil . There's something about a loud yank getting tased that stirs a warm fuzzy feeling inside

[video=youtube;6bVa6jn4rpE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE[/video]

SO anyway, given that 2 people have died who were tased recently, do you believe that Taser guns should be banned for use by the police force?

Interested to hear what you reckon...

 

[Dozer]

I'm all for it. If you get yourself in a position where the fuzz see a need to nail you to the floor then you more than likely deserve it. There is a chance you will die if you get shot by a gun, there is a chance you will die if you get tazered, there is a chance you will die if you try to smuggle drugs into some Asian countries, there is a chance you will die (or get injured............) if you suffer a bad crash on your bike...................... You put yourself in that situation so you should use your intelligence to avoid something that may get your arse shot.

 

[Richo 18]

Argh that video.. I need to see at the previous situation to view it in the proper light, but I felt bad for him the whole time. Was it just because he asked a controversial question? The guy speaking on stage or whatever seemed like he wanted to answer his question and everything...

 

[RCOH]

Being a news and current affairs junkie I couldnt help but notice the raging debate about the suitable use of Taser guns in Australia of late.



SO anyway, given that 2 people have died who were tased recently, do you believe that Taser guns should be banned for use by the police force?

.

The guy in western Sydney died last night, what is the 2nd Taser death?

I'm with Dozer, I'd prefer to get tasered than shot.

 

[3viltoast3r]

Dozer is right. I shaked my head then changed the channel last night when I saw the 'exclusive interview with innocent man who's brother got tazered and brutally bashed by police'.

Stuff the left/right surveys on the ABC, let's do a wanker checks on Packer's network

 

[tc2233]

I think they shouldnt be banned by the police. If the police ever had to stop me I would rather be tased than be shot by a gun which would most likely kill me (not that i would get myself in that situation).
As my uncle who is a cop says "A dead man can't speak in court". By having the tasers at least the cops would stop you with a taser and have a 2nd chance at life.
Sure the tasers are sometimes used in unnecessary situations but if you were a cop you would be wanting to prevent your work mates and yourself from injury and I dont see why you wouldnt taser the person who is causing a problem.
I know there have been a few people in the past that have died from a taser but thats their problem for not co-operating and surrendering to police.

 

[Mattydv]

I had a pretty length convo with the sergeant at St Kilda, and she's against them - and having spoken to her I'd agree with her to an extent.

Basically her arguments revolved around that the having such an ease of access to them stops police developing, maintaining and utilising negotiation skills and tactics. She said that there are such a huge number of incidents where new/inexperienced cops and cops that cannot be bothered to go through the process of negotiation will easily use tasers, and this is nothing but a bad thing. She then went on to say that there are a larger number of situations that they are not required than those that are, and this outweighs the positives.

There are times that they are useful, but the majority of times they will be used, there can be alternative ways to solve the situation. And I think that video posted earlier proves exactly that.

Edit: Police in NZ don't even carry guns (only carry them on armed call-outs) - and there's minimal resultance of violence in daily duties. Not saying that's directly related (I don't have any studies to back it up), but I think there is definitely an element of connection.

Edit #2: Also Dozer, I don't necessarily agree. I think my point above, combined with other elements of situational perception or even stereotypes could result in an amount of misuse, where an individual hasn't necessarily put themselves in a situation that they deserve to get tasered.

 

[Ivan]

video

I'm certainly for police carrying tasers, however that video is a classic example of it being used inappropriately. It's ridiculous that the 5 or 6 police could not subdue and arrest 1 unarmed man, without any assistance, without using a taser.

 

[Cypher]

I am against the police using tasers. The reasons include the above comment about negotiation - they are too easy to use.

Also with more and more people having poor health due to obesity, poor nutrition, drug use etc, they are not all that safe to use. I would expect that tasers get used mostly on drunk/drugged people - can their heart stand up to that sort of combined impact? You need to include the stress of conflict as well into the equation. People even die from capsicum spray.

Finally a disproportionate number of Aboriginals are getting tasered.

I think police can do without.

 

[Dozer]

I think police can do without.

Who else would use them if Police don't? They are the front line and first point of contact when dealing with criminals (or people acting like criminals). If you provide a serviceman with a taser instead of a gun do you think they'd try to negotiate with a possible threat (as in someone else with a crazy mind wanting to shoot them)?
Do people honestly believe that Police are simply walking up to random dudes walking along listening to their Ipod and tazering them? No! They aren't! They are doing what the Police should do and that is attempting to reprimand criminals. If you think negotiating with people is the only way of dealing with tough situations then you need to go and start a fist fight with someone and try to negotiate. If that fails and things become out of hand and violent you will want to stop the dude (or dudette......) from attacking you and causing harm. How do you stop them? You either shoot them in the face (keeping in mind that they may have a heart condition) or you tazer them (keeping in mind that shooting them will more than likely dismember part of their head).
I sure as shit would love to know that the Police have the power to stop some bonehead from hurting me or my friends or family or dog or neighbour's dog.

 

[Tomas]

I'd like the state police forces to have significantly more training in dealing with people suffering from mental diseases. I think equipping police with a 'less lethal' device - an option to a lethal firearm - without addressing systemic causes is misguided.

Best poll ever though - dont tase me bro / tase me up. Awesome.

 

[Cypher]

Do people honestly believe that Police are simply walking up to random dudes walking along listening to their Ipod and tazering them? No! They aren't! They are doing what the Police should do and that is attempting to reprimand criminals.

Occasional police due use excessive use of force. So do you belive that police should have the right to beat you into a pulp (and split your liver and leave you to die in a cell) because you give a bit of lip? Or essentially torture you by tasering you 13 times because you are a bit unruly in the night lock up?

You are not a criminal until you have been charged and convicted in a court of law. Police do have a hard job, but they are not always the saints people make them out to be. Nor do they get all the training they should.

 

[frenchman]

You are not a criminal until you have been charged and convicted in a court of law. Police do have a hard job, but they are not always the saints people make them out to be. Nor do they get all the training they should.

You mean a 'convicted criminal' right?

 

[Cypher]

You mean a 'convicted criminal' right?

Ahh. So are we going to allow our police to determine guilt? Because that always works so well.

It may sound like I'm beating up on the police, and to a degree I am, but don't forget this is a group of people who barely have a tertiary degree (and for all those people who actually have a degree realise how little it prepared you for real life) and then go out and deal with some of the most difficult problems in society - mental illness, entrenched poverty, racism and discrimination, domestic violence and drug use.

But because they are "crime fighters" they really only have a few strategies for dealing with these issues. I would really like to see a return to community policing - where the majority of the work police do is working with community groups to solve problems before they become crime, rather than trying to deal with the problems afterwards.

Remember there are two ways to reduce crime. Have lots of police with fancy weaponry or stop it before it becomes a problem. Have a guess which one is the cheaper option and have better outcomes all around?

 

[Dozer]

Remember there are two ways to reduce crime. Have lots of police with fancy weaponry or stop it before it becomes a problem. Have a guess which one is the cheaper option and have better outcomes all around?

Too many people believe that they are above the law and they feel as though they need to resist or even fight the Police. You can't teach people otherwise because they are simply born and bred as dickheads. What possible teaching or education could you give a grown adult or a teenager that doesn't like doing what he or she is told is right? Look at what happens when you stick someone in jail: they get a fancy TV, a gym to use, cooked meals, shelter, a bed, some even have Playstations! For crying out loud, we work to earn those things and people get it dumped in their laps after they decided it was time to do the wrong thing by people in their community and commit crimes.
I cannot see a way of teaching anyone the right thing from early on except for scaring it into them that doing the wrong thing will get you shot. As you learn a bit of street smart as you grow older you realise what is right and wrong and you avoid coming into contact with the law.
I'm happy to pay taxes to have Police trained to stop crooks. I don't really care how much it costs as long as it keeps us safe and free. Money isn't the issue here. The issue is stupid people doing stupid things and then crying foul because they got schooled.

 

[Mattydv]

but don't forget this is a group of people who barely have a tertiary degree

As far as I know (conversation with a Victorian superintendent few months back) there's actually no degree that directly applies to policing. The bachelor of policing or whatever its called technically doesn't actually give the officer any sort of tertiary credentials as it's not officially recognised.

And Dozer, I think the argument for the majority is not that they should never be used (if this was the case they wouldn't even be carrying guns) - but the circumstances that they are most commonly used. They're treated too nonchalantly, as if they're just a quick fix to a problem.

 

[Cypher]

Wow Dozer. You really have been sold a line by the Daily Terrorgraph/John Laws and the talkback radio set.

Got some fear? I sells you some fear.

Do you think people can't learn because you can't learn? I know that to be totally untrue.

I challenge you, therefore, to read some articles from BOSCAR http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/ You will see that it is not all bad, and that a lot of community programs do have a significant effect on crime.

Also if you are interested in something lighter, try Ross Gittins: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/count...mphasis-in-crime-reduction-20090609-c25y.html

or http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...-fix-the-jails-20100427-tps1.html?autostart=1

 

[frenchman]

Ahh. So are we going to allow our police to determine guilt? Because that always works so well.

Were you caught speeding or given a drinking / urinating in public infringement? Is this why you have such resentment toward the police force?

Agreed that Police should not determine guilt, but they are using tazers as a 2nd last resort? The impression you're giving me is that they will be using tazers for just about anything.

It may sound like I'm beating up on the police, and to a degree I am, but don't forget this is a group of people who barely have a tertiary degree (and for all those people who actually have a degree realise how little it prepared you for real life) and then go out and deal with some of the most difficult problems in society - mental illness, entrenched poverty, racism and discrimination, domestic violence and drug use.

Fuck me, you should enrol at QUT. Should impose a 4 year bachelor of arts degree before you can enlist to join the armed forces as well.

But because they are "crime fighters" they really only have a few strategies for dealing with these issues. I would really like to see a return to community policing - where the majority of the work police do is working with community groups to solve problems before they become crime, rather than trying to deal with the problems afterwards.

I'm not familiar with the history or the results of 'community policing'. - edit reading those links now.

Remember there are two ways to reduce crime. Have lots of police with fancy weaponry or stop it before it becomes a problem. Have a guess which one is the cheaper option and have better outcomes all around?
If you've got proof of this I'm genuinely interested to read about them.

..........

 

[thecat]

If I was doing my job and someone was putting my life in danger I would like to have the option of a taser.

I was talking to a cop who is licensed to use on and he said in Australia part of the train was you had to get hit yourself so you know what it's like.

He said pepper spray was a hour or two of agony. The Taser was 1 sec. he said he'd take pepper spray everytime

 

[Cypher]

..........

Is this why you have such resentment toward the police force?
Actually no. I have never had personal experience with police beyond reporting a stolen item. In which case it took a few moments of their time and was otherwise like any other transaction. However you don't need to have personal experience in every part of society to be concerned about how some parts don't work too well - and what can be done to make it better.

Should impose a 4 year bachelor of arts degree before you can enlist to join the armed forces as well.
I can't say that a longer degree would be better. Perhaps it would - probably not. I think the theory followed by an apprentice/internship/traineeship would be better. Only that police don't get a lot of training before they deal with some of the most complex and interconnected problems in society. In our rush to put ever more police 'on the front' line all we are getting are novices on the beat - young police people who probably don't have the richness of experience and skill to manage some pretty fraught situations.

Like the 13yo girl who just got capsicum spray from the police in Victoria. The police said that it was a last resort. But was it? Yes, she had two knives and probably was a pretty emotional situation. And I know 13yo's who wont listen to anybody. But what if she was Aboriginal? Police tend to have a bad relationship with them - would you listen to some big blokes you know don't like you and your people? What could have been done better? Could the police been more proactive in the community helping people so this situation did not arise? Why did the girl feel she needed knives to solve the situation?

If you've got proof of this I'm genuinely interested to read about them.Enjoy BOSCAR - its there. There is a national level one as well. The name escapes me at the moment, but you can find the link on BOSCAR