Normally, the UN can kiss my ass, but..... by 6ixStringJack

"Tasers do NOT result in death. In every recorded case it has been due to additional factors almost always involving resistance from the suspect and use of additional weapons or techniques"

Unadulterated Bullshit, Tpage.

I've posted case after case, even two full studies where it was fully implicated - hell, they've even got a bullshit excuse, calling it "Excited Delirium".

But find me ONE single. solitary. case.

Where someone died from "ED" other than in police custody, as a result of compression asphixia, reaction to pepper spray, tasering, or some combination of the above.

Find me ONE single. case.

ONE.

So far, nobody's been able to do that, and what that tells me is that "ED" deaths are bullshit, and a coverup for murder-by-police, negligent or intentional.

And before you even open your mouth so shovel the rest of the shitstorm excuse, less than a QUARTER of all supposed "ED" deaths had any drugs or alcohol in their system.

If yer gonna argue the case, do it with something other than a set of Faery-Tale talking points someone else spoonfed you, thanks, cause I am gettin downright sick of that.

Beyond that is the simple common sense concept that we use, medically, electrical shock to the chest cavity to restart (paddles) or regulate (pacemaker) heart function, and is it so painfully hard to believe that a substantial electrical shock to the chest cavity under stressful conditions could UN-regulate heart function ?

The Taser is not, repeat *NOT*, a non-lethal device, even the US Military classifies it as a LESS-lethal device, as in less lethal than getting shot, which is the alternative.

Yes, used properly, they could save lives where otherwise you'd have no alternative but to shoot someone - but it's come down to the simple fact that the police as a force have proven beyond a doubt that without a radical reform of use policy, or revamp of force structure, they simply can NOT be trusted with the damned things.

What's worse is that it got this ugly in part due to denial and shouting down folks pointing out the problem for eighteen straight months before it became undeniably clear that there was a serious problem here - and now that abuse is completely rampant, good LUCK sticking that genie back in the bottle now that police have the ability to deliver a little vigilante "street justice" on those they don't like, or don't display complete subservience.

They know, even if it's a bullshit arrest that'll be thrown out before it ever gets to court, that they "got theirs" by handing out some pain and suffering - the EXACT SAME mindset and behavior one finds in juvenille street gangs or criminal mafias, only we accept this one lording over us because of the insane belief that words on paper can protect us from the ugly realities of life.

It's stupid, end to end, and unless they are willing to accept the revamps, reforms and oversight that would be absolutely *required* to prevent their abuse of the device, then hell no, they shouldn't have it - and even dumber is that adopting them and placing the Taser correctly on the force continuum would actually offer some level of legal protection to officers who did have to use one because they would be able to justify it's use in a court of law... but nope, they want their ego stroked more than they want the job done.

And that really tells me all I need to know, doesn't it ?

"Well, all I can say is that if this is the direction we're moving in, I can only consider the cops as my enemy, and by extension, myself a criminal. Go ahead. Keep pushing us."

Sarge, as I have said before, I have an understanding with the locals of the police dept, since they live here too - out of uniform, off duty, I will treat them as a person and fellow human, just like anyone else... especially since I fix small engine yard equipment around here...

But when they don the blues and the badge, they're the enemy, a jackbooted fascist thug and strongarm of the states oppressive apparatus and they'll be treated as such - their job *requires* them to treat me as a possible suspect and threat, to which my response will be, and always is, equal in kind.

If they refuse to see me as anything but a potential perp, I refuse to see them as anything but a potential assailant, it's just that simple.

"I was just hoping that people who posit tasers as an all purpose tool will understand that their original use was as an alternative to deadly force only"

Agreed, Rue - like I been sayin all along, LESS-lethal, not NON-lethal.
As for de-escalation, it's been addressed time and time again, and I will repost it again.
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/deescalation.htm

In EVERY one of these videos, the police have totally hosed the de-escalation, often negligently or intentionally escalating the situation themselves, which speaks of a bad attitude, piss-poor training, and downright incompetence.

And yes, I damn well will shadowdance a cop who's hassling me, just to see if he even notices, and they're usually clueless, to be honest.

(I'll note for the record that the officer in the Utah video was just plain positionally CLUELESS, a determined assailant would have eaten him for breakfast in an eyeblink.)

"The answer, however, is not disarming the police, but rather punishing severely those among them who misuse and abuse their authority."

BK, I been sayin that.. the free pass and lettin em off easy has to stop, anyone who swore an oath to uphold the law and THEN maliciously violates it deserves a hands-down maximum no-parole sentence.

Thing is, again, you have the entire police force covering for these guys even when they know for a fact that they're dirty, the police union, the FOP, and sympathisers leaning on the court, judge and jury, bending a few political ears, behavior straight out of a mafia flick.

When they start truly facing the music for this behavior, it'll stop.

"The simple fact is that it is more dangerous than ever to be a police officer of any level."

Which means less dangerous than working in construction, a fishing boat, or for a cab company by a VERY large margin - they might milk the supposed risk for all it's worth, but they volunteered to do it, which doesn't buy em no credit with me given how they put on a big show when one of their own caps it, but don't even send so much as an honor squad to hang their heads in shame over the folks the force has intentionally or negligently murdered (usually due to no-knock raids) as an honest gesture of penance.

Till they do that, and I honestly think it a good policy from a community relations and simple decency aspect... why should I then offer respect to their fallen when they do not offer it to anyone elses ?

And if they wanna whine about how dangerous it is, let em find a new career... like, say, driving a cab, which is 25 times more dangerous than bein cop, and ya don't hear ME whining about it on and on, do ya ?
(Rue and I did some research on that little faery-tale a while back...)

You're whole argument falls apart beyond that point, because of the simple empirical, fully researched and proven fact that they have rampantly abused every tool ever given them with virtual impunity - do your homework rather than regurgitating spoon-fed talking points.

If you kept loaning someone money, and they NEVER paid it back, ever - you'd stop loaning them money eventually, wouldn't you ?

They've violated the public trust, and become a danger to the very things they are supposed to be protecting - if you put up a fence to keep your cattle safe, but the charge was too high and you lost a quarter of your herd that way, you'd say the fence was counterproductive, yes ?

I want em to DO THEIR JOB, and do it with a minimum of abuse, excess and stupidity.
My trash collector can do it.
My auto mechanic can do it.
My landscaping company can do it.
My home contractors can do it.

So why the hell can't the police do it ?

Given how poor their performance is, were they not a government sponsored monopoly, I'd farm it out to the free market and hire someone a little more professional, like.. the bloods, crips, hell even the triads.

"Obviously, all law enforcement in the country hasn't gotten appropriate training, but if you give up any tool that a few misuse, pretty soon you're down to nothing."

Well, Geeze...

Then give em nothing, make em EARN those tools by displaying proper training, method and use, good heavens... that's one use of my tax dollars I wouldn't bitch about, cause we'd get it back in spades from not having to pay out the damn lawsuits.

And I am of the firm opinion that in such a case where the suit is judged against the police as a documented fact of abuse, that the taxpayer should not be held liable, dock every cop in the department to pay for it - and watch them clean their OWN damn house in a big fuckin hurry, eh ?

I mean look at the stupidity of it.
Cop abuses victim.
Victim sues and wins in court.
Court assigns judgement.
City pays out of police budget or general fund.
Police budget bloats to compensate.
State jacks taxes, taking it out of you, me, and the victim to pay the judgement.

Screw that, the cops boned it, make THEM pay it.

Good to see you HK, couple of other threads I'd not mind your input on, btw.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 1:50 PM

Wow, both barrels, clipped duplicate post.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Not even 32.9 million.

You forget that 1) populations were lower in the 1980's and there were fewer people to infect and 2) malaria has been spreading to places - including cities - where it never existed before, infecting a far larger percentage of people than ever.

I'm interested when the UN invented malaria. Apparrently they've killed people with their meddling, and to support that we're given malaria deaths. Logically for that not to be a contradiction, the UN would have to have created malaria, no?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:06 PM

BADKARMA00

Rue,

Full of attitude? lol, thats funny

Im curious where you get your facts from. Ever worn a badge? Ever faced a man with a gun, or a woman for that matter, or watched while a criminal threatened to kill an innocent bystander?
Love to know where you get the 500x more dangerous to be a a farmer or a logger. I live in an area rife with logging, and abundant in farm land.
Does your statement mean that for every police officer killed or injured on the job, there are 500 injuries or deaths in these other fields? I'm just curious, not bashing what you said.
And, as I recall, polio was declared 'eradicated' some years back, yet we're still seeing polio cases. I admit that I hadn't read where the UN eradicated smallpox, but if they did, then good. I stand corrected, they have done one thing worth talking about.
That doesn't trump their uselessness in other areas though. Face it, the UN is just another bloated program that exists largely on funds provided by the US taxpayers, for which our thanks is their unwavering opposition to all things American.
How's that for attitude, dude?

Bad_karma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:17 PM

LEADB

Citizen, I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's saying is that if the UN had not meddled, there would have been 32 million fewer malaria deaths. Apparently left to their own devices, the local folks would have found an effective and affordable way to stop malaria cold.

Now, I'm not saying he's right. Frankly, I think it's a rather silly position to take.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:17 PM

BADKARMA00

Having read some of the recent posts in this thread after my last one, I once again find myself wondering why I bother. The fact is that everyone has an opinion, and they will stick to it no matter what. And I don't exclude myself from that either.
I'm convinced that ESD's are a good tool, and oppose any effort to take them off the board as an alternative to shooting someone. I wore a badge for many years, and despite what some of you seem to think, honest cops hate dirty ones. It may be that my difference of opinion comes from living in a less populated area, I don't know. I'm aware that many of the older and larger cities are plagued with PD's that are essentially a old boy network, covering for each other.
You can all say that the job isnt dangerous, and fall back on 'let them find another job'. But what will you do when you need them, and find that they're all off driving the cab, or logging, or whatever other more dangerous job you claim to have found?
Anyway, I got better things to do than keep hammering my head against a wall like this, and I imagine you guys do to. There's a simple answer, once you strip away the hysteria and hype.
But since when do we do the simple things here in America. I mean, the simple things don't get us on TV do they?
So argue me out, and take care all.

Bad_karma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:20 PM

LEADB

Quote:
Originally posted by badkarma00:
Love to know where you get the 500x more dangerous to be a a farmer or a logger. I live in an area rife with logging, and abundant in farm land.

Someone found an analysis of deaths in the United States based on occupation, and posted it in one of the RWED threads. If you search FFF you might be able to find it, but I know I was rather surprised to see how many professions had a higher casualty rate than police officers.

If Rue quotes 500x, I'm sure it's right. I don't remember the details.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I'm interested when the UN invented malaria. Apparrently they've killed people with their meddling, and to support that we're given malaria deaths. Logically for that not to be a contradiction, the UN would have to have created malaria, no?

The UN based on bad science, halted the use of the most effective insecticide(DDT) to prevent the "Malaria vector"(Mosquito)for 30 years. Maybe "killing" is to harsh, would you prefer negligent homicide.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:47 PM

It's called self-defense, kid.

Cops arrive in time to draw the chalk outlines anyhow, and I don't intend them to be around me.

But seriously, I just want em to DO the job they're paid to do without the abuse and whinging, is that too much to ask ?

Cause if it is... why have em ?

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:58 PM

And as for the stats, here.

Originally posted by RUE - here
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=31277

Quote:
BTW I know that a big deal has been made over the 'risk' of being a cop and why we should cut them some slack 'cause of all the 'danger' they face.

Doing some checking I found there were http://stats.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfoi_revised05.htm 110 'police officer' deaths out of approximately 864,000 (0.01%) http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/police/index.html, while there were 47 'underground miner' deaths out of less than 19,000 (0.25 %).

I really think those underground miners deserve to react irrationally at times, due to the severe risk they face on the job.

***************************************************************
Cops are clearly wusses.

Quote:
Farming has THE highest fatality RATE, mining a close second, and 'transportation' after that, but cab drivers weren't a searchable category.

And I swear the BLS/ OSHA go out of their way to make the figures hard to come by.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA - here
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=31277

Quote:
Hey Rue ?

Found some stats for ya.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/26/pf/jobs_jeopardy/

Puts a bit of perspective on the so-called risk that the bluesuits milk every drop of public sympathy for - and nobody but the dispatcher, cussing the hole in his roster, gives much of a damn when a cabbie caps it.

Remind me not to go fishin anytime soon tho...

-F

Any more Faery Tales you need blown up ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 3:21 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Ever worn a badge? NO
Ever faced a man with a gun, or a woman for that matter YES - man (actually a policeman, who drew a gun on me as I wandered out with my dish towel to view the aftermath of a car accident in front of the next door neighbor's house)
or watched while a criminal threatened to kill an innocent bystander YES

The ECMC ER and surrounding neighborhood (where I lived for a while) were interesting places. I've also personally been stalked (4 times), beaten-up (once), had my dwelling burglarized twice (once when I was home), car stolen (once) and vandalized (more times than I can remember), threatened by a drug-seeking patient, exposed to several types of hepatitis, AIDS, and CJD. No life or job is without risk.

OOPS. I meant 50x not 500. (typo)

It's by percentages of fatalities in job categories. These figures were gleaned from the BLS and other official sources.
--------------------------------------------

"polio was declared 'eradicated' some years back"

Polio has been eradicated around MOST of the globe. However, there are some places where the eradication effort was halted leading to an increase in polio which was then re-introduced into previously polio-free areas. There are also some isolated and remote areas with endemic polio that is a special strain not well-covered by the vaccine. Polio eradication is still an ongoing process and expected to be completed in the near future.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 3:23 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Kirkules

"The UN based on bad science, halted the use of the most effective insecticide(DDT) to prevent the "Malaria vector"(Mosquito)for 30 years. Maybe "killing" is to harsh, would you prefer negligent homicide."

When it comes to malaria:

"In 1955, the World Health Organization commenced a program to eradicate malaria worldwide, relying largely on DDT. Though this program was initially highly successful worldwide ... resistance soon emerged in many insect populations as a consequence of widespread agricultural use of DDT. In many areas, early victories against malaria were partially or completely reversed, and in some cases rates of transmission even increased.
Although the publication of Silent Spring undoubtedly influenced the U.S. ban on DDT in 1972, the reduced usage of DDT in malaria eradication began the decade before because of the emergence of DDT-resistant mosquitoes. In some areas DDT has lost much of its effectiveness, especially in areas such as India where outdoor transmission is the predominant form. Due to this DDT resistance, in Sri Lanka, parts of India, Pakistan, Turkey and Central America, DDT has already been replaced by organophosphate or carbamate insecticides, e.g. malathion or bendiocarb.
Criticisms of a ban on DDT often refer specifically to the 1972 US ban (with the implication that this constituted a worldwide ban), while ignoring that DDT has NOT been banned for public health use in most areas of the world where malaria is endemic." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT

In most of rural Africa, the UN is using insecticide-treated sleeping nets as the preferred method of malaria control. http://www.afro.who.int/malaria/publications/who_unicef_joint_statemen
t.pdf

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 3:40 PM

BADKARMA00

50x I can buy well enough, especially as it deals with percentages, not actual figures without regard to per capita. Thanks for the post.
Like I said, most of you on here bashing the cops seem to live in bigger cities, and probably Yankee cities at that, though Im guessing. And they do seem to have PD's with attitude enough to spare.
It just seems to me that bashing ALL cops based on the actions of a few is like declaring all cars bad because a few malfunctioned. People wearing a badge are just as prone to fear as anyone else, and they are just human.
Anyway, wanted to say thanks for the info, and like I said before, this isn't getting anywhere, so maybe next time I can bit my lip instead of winding up in one of these threads.
Hope you all have a great, safe, holiday season!

Bad_karma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 3:46 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

My uncle was a cop so I know not all cops are bad. But in the light of a few bad cops (and there are some really bad ones) one needs to have excellent policies. IMHO

Anyway, I hope you have a great safe holiday season yourself !

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Although the publication of Silent Spring undoubtedly influenced the U.S. ban on DDT in 1972,

DDT has already been replaced by organophosphate or carbamate insecticides, e.g. malathion or bendiocarb.

I've read all of this before. Just because DDT was improperly used was not a reason to stop using it for thirty years. Many pesticides are misused but the answer isn't to ban them its to train people to use them properly. I'm still not convinced that any of the alternative insecticides are as effective as DDT. I do think the ban in the US made sense because the risk out weighed the benefit here.

Of course I am biased by the fact that I'm still pissed off about the banning of Cloridane in the US. Went from being able to effectively prevent termites for about $5 to having to pay a professional $1200.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:24 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

1) DDT was improperly used in agriculture so it stopped working for malaria control.
2) DDT was not banned in most places outside the US especially for vector control.
3) "then you need to apply some of the handy chemicals out there that contain boron. Not only can you protect your house's lumber from wood boring insects like termites, beetles and carpenter ants, the borate chemicals also protect against fungi (brown, white, and wet rot) that cause wood decay.
The application of borate solutions directly to lumber is not really new. These chemicals have been widely used in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand for nearly 40 years."
http://www.askthebuilder.com/272-StopTermites-Soak-Wood-with-Safe-Bora
tes.shtml

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:28 PM

Thanks for the info unfortunately Borates are only effective when applied pre-construction.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:29 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

They can be applied post-construction but you have to be careful to apply it to all places.
http://www.prginc.com/Borates/boracare-table.pdf
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:46 PM

SERGEANTX

Thanks to you, HK, for trying. But it seems you were right. Those who most need to hear it aren't listening.

I'll just say this much. If any of these chickenshits uses a taser on me or mine, he'd better fucking kill me. 'Cause I won't be forgettin'.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Like the cop that tasered the driver who wouldn't sign the ticket ? Oh, I told him to, he didn't so I used my taser.

A sterling example of the necessary use of a taser.
If you say so. Sounds more like an inappropriate use to me, if what you say is true, but a cop can just as easily misuse, with far worse consequences, pepper spray or a baton.

I was going to wait until the end to make a post, which I still plan on doing, but I had to comment on this invalid argument because it is just so egregiously wrong.

First of all, in this particular example, the man did not do anything illegal whatsoever. By Utah law, you are not required to sign a ticket, but this is a moot point in the first place. After having recieved a citation, even if he were to rip it up in front of the officer, he has still violated the law by speeding and will have violated the law again if he doesn't show up to court or pay the fine. Now he will have to answer for two crimes, instead of one.

Pretty stupid, right?

This cop was just on a power trip and tazed the guy because he had the audacity not to act like a scared little eunich when the cop was bossing him around and acting in an inappropriate manner by giving orders that the civilian did not have to comply with in the first place.

Then he got tazed for standing up for his rights.

HERE IS THE BIG POINT (THUS, THE BOLD TYPE AND CAPITAL LETTERS):

THIS COP WOULD NOT HAVE BRUTALIZED THIS MAN WITH A BATON OR SHOT HIM HAD HE NOT BEEN ARMED WITH THE TAZER. LOOKING ONLY AT THIS ONE PARTICULAR CASE WITHOUT ANY OUTSIDE INFLUENCE, THE TAZER GAVE THIS COP THE ABILITY TO EXERT HIS WILL ON SOMEONE WHO HE HAD NO RESPECT FOR.... PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Three more points I'd like to make:

1. I have no use for the UN at all and I loathe them even more than police. I simply used that to get a debate started here, which apparently worked very well.

2. I am not calling for a ban on tazers altogether, just a very in-depth training regimen for all law enforcement officials who will carry one. And, much more importanlty, a very serious inquery into officers who have been accused of misusing the tazer. One in which officers really are punished, suspended and even terminated without benefits for mis-use of the tazer. ONE WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE A "REFLEX" ACTION TO USE THE TAZER AND MAKE AN OFFICER THINK JUST AS HARD ABOUT USING THE TAZER AS HE WOULD USING A GUN.

3. I honestly don't see how anybody could watch this video on either side of the fence and not agree that this cop deserves to be punished severely for what he has done. If cops didn't get caught on camera doing stupid shit like this, people like me wouldn't have much of an argument in the first place. He's just making it easier for our case and harder for your case.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:52 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Like the cop that tasered the driver who wouldn't sign the ticket ? Oh, I told him to, he didn't so I used my taser.

A sterling example of the necessary use of a taser.
If you say so. Sounds more like an inappropriate use to me, if what you say is true, but a cop can just as easily misuse, with far worse consequences, pepper spray or a baton.
I was going to wait until the end to make a post, which I still plan on doing, but I had to comment on this invalid argument because it is just so egregiously wrong.

And what is so egregiously wrong about this argument?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 4:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And what is so egregiously wrong about this argument?

Sorry Finn. I got all wrapped up in the post that I didn't get to that until after you posted back apparently.

It's the part in bold caps where I said:

THIS COP WOULD NOT HAVE BRUTALIZED THIS MAN WITH A BATON OR SHOT HIM HAD HE NOT BEEN ARMED WITH THE TAZER. LOOKING ONLY AT THIS ONE PARTICULAR CASE WITHOUT ANY OUTSIDE INFLUENCE, THE TAZER GAVE THIS COP THE ABILITY TO EXERT HIS WILL ON SOMEONE WHO HE HAD NO RESPECT FOR.... PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Not that I'm yelling at you here. Should have probably decapitalized it here for the repeat to you, but I'm being lazy now.....

I altered the post a bit more than that too. Not used to somebody replying so quickly the hours that I'm posting here....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:07 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I altered the post a bit more than that too. Not used to somebody replying so quickly the hours that I'm posting here....

I actually just sat down at the computer (taking a break from painting my living room). I didn’t realize that you had just posted. Normally, I do wait little while before replying to see if the poster makes any changes.

Anyway, I don’t agree with your assertion that the officer would not have brutalized this person if he hadn’t have had a taser. You could be right, but you have no way of knowing that and it certainly doesn’t make sense to personify a taser with some sort of abusive power, because it is the officer, not the instrument, that is abusive. If an officer is abusive, he or she will be so with or without a taser. It just so happens that the taser is the instrument commonly used today. In the past, it was the baton. Officers abused their power long before tasers came on the scene and they will do so long after tasers are replaced with something else. There will always be a certain (small) percentage of bad cops. And their actions will never be the fault of the instrument they are using. As far as controlling the use of tasers, that also has nothing to do with the taser, but everything to do with limiting abuse of powerful in the police force. To put the taser center front on this matter, does nothing more then draw attention away form the real issue.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:15 PM

No worries. Sorry for the confusion. I tend to re-read my posts and alter them a bit. Bad habit, I know, but it's the way my brain works and I just go with it.

But I see we're coming to a point we can have some common ground though. You are correct in that there is no way that I could know if this officer would not have resorted to the club had he not had a tazer. He very well may have. We've already witnessed his lack of regard for this other man. It's just that I think he would have thought very hard about crossing that line, because of the lasting and visible effects that a bashing would leave. You know.... visible proof of wrongdoing.

I think we both agree here that in this particular case, the officer was wrong. I just think that this officer should be just as severely punished for what he has done as he would have been had he bludgeoned this guy with the club or popped a cap in his knees.

I'm not calling for disarming the cops, just a serious investigation be done on misuses such as this.

Can you agree with that? Because if you can, my work here is done.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:18 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
You could be right, but you have no way of knowing that and it certainly doesn’t make sense to personify a taser with some sort of abusive power, because it is the officer, not the instrument, that is abusive. If an officer is abusive, he or she will be so with or without a taser. It just so happens that the taser is the instrument commonly used today. In the past, it was the baton. Officers abused their power long before tasers came on the scene and they will do so long after tasers are replaced with something else. There will always be a certain (small) percentage of bad cops. And their actions will never be the fault of the instrument they are using. As far as controlling the use of tasers, that also has nothing to do with the taser, but everything to do with limiting abuse of powerful in the police force. To put the taser center front on this matter, does nothing more then draw attention away form the real issue.

The only way to know if tasers induce abusive behavior is to look at the frequency of "baton use" before introducing tasers versus the frequency of taser use and baton use afterwards. Although I doubt that it would be easy to come by these statistics.

Someone in another thread- same topic- said that they WANT the use of force to be fraught with danger and consequence for the cop and I agree with that reasoning. There has to be some sort of barrier to "bad cop-ism".

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
For every one person the UN has helped, they probably have killed two with their meddling. Looks like maybe 50 million may have died over the past 30 years from Malaria thanks to UN.

Shit, a few more they'd be competing with the US government.

Always the brides maid UN.

Citizen:
After having read some of your posts I will readily concede that you are ________ more intelligent and articulate than myself. Having said that, If you chose to talk down to me, or badmouth my country again, I promise name calling will in-sue.
Edited: Remove word "probably"

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:25 PM

Jack, what stuck in my craw overtop of that was the sheer arrogance of flat out lying about it, on camera... like he didn't care, cause no one is gonna take him to task for it cause he's a cop.

THAT, imop, is far more dangerous in the long run than the tasing was.

And it's the core and root of the problem.

Sarge ?
Ya might be interested, the same folk who brought to you the cell phone jammer are workin on a project resurrected from back when a lot of rapists were using stunguns, although I am not gonna spare any more details than that at this time.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:31 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

OOOOOOHHHH ! Interesting notion. Well man, I'll be ready for you to dish.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:32 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"badmouth my country"

Uhhhh. The US has a LOT to answer for. You know that, right ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:54 PM

I don't really mind being called a dumb ass, as long as the person doing so has some wisdom to impart in addition. Ive already learned a lot reading this site. I don't even mind people trashing the US if they've got a particular grievance they would like to discuss. Just seems impolite to talk bad about another's home country for no particular reason.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Citizen:
After having read some of your posts I will readily concede that you are probably more intelligent and articulate than myself. Having said that, If you chose to talk down to me, or badmouth my country again, I promise name calling will in-sue.

Don't mind Cit. He hates America and Americans and reason. Don't bother arguing with him either because he's always right.

Better to just ignore him and he'll go away if he has nobody to fight with.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 6:03 PM

I hear ya all the way Frem. The tazing is only a symptom of his extreme arrogance and disrespect for people around him. He is a cop and a civvy wasn't doing what he was commanding him to do and regardless of the legality of his orders he was going to show this guy who was boss.

Just don't think there are a lot of cops willing to cross that line anymore with batons because the brutality of the stick is much more readily apparent than it is with a tazer, particularly when everybody hears what a great thing the tazer is and how it's completely safe.

The tazer seriously undermines the focal point of this situation, which is where the line between upholding the law as an officer and crossing that line actually stands.

If used as a means to absolute compliance, rather than self defense, the tazer is one of the most dangerous weapons mankind has ever invented against freedom.
-------

Can't wait to hear what it is you're talking about. I'll look like a spaceman with my cell phone jammer, my faraday cage, my tazer blocker body suit and my tinfoil hat.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 6:12 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I know that 'tinfoil' hats (commonly meant to refer to aluminum foil) are a funny reference to paranoia.

SignyM mentioned in a PM about a call from a concerned citizen who said the people in the upstarts apartment were beaming signals in to control her thoughts. She'd already tried aluminum foil.

Just a reminder that indeed there are people who really are paranoid and delusional and maybe even hallucinating a bit. And they are in a major hell not of their own making, and, crazy as they are, they know enough to still try to find a way out.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 6:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I know that 'tinfoil' hats (commonly meant to refer to aluminum foil) are a funny reference to paranoia.

...

Just a reminder that indeed there are people who really are paranoid and delusional and maybe even hallucinating a bit. And they are in a major hell not of their own making, and, crazy as they are, they know enough to still try to find a way out.

Yup.... that all about sums me up, though I really don't think there is any need for tinfoil hats because we've all been conditioned very well from 3 generations of television. Maybe tinfoil sunglasses, but then I'd have to wear them all day and bump into all kinds of shit, and more importantly, I'd have to turn that damn boob tube off once in a while.

I don't think I'm in hell though. I'm just hoping there is a heaven and it's a lot better than here. Otherwise, I really can't see the point in any of this....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:10 PM

*hands Jack one monkeywrench, one bag of sand, and detailed instructions*

The POINT, Jack, is to leave this shithole a better place than we found it, not a worse one, and if that fails, stem the tide as best we can.

Be damned if I want my nieces to face the future of MY failures.

Oh, and FYI, found a manufacturer of the product mentioned above that doesn't lead back to my people, so here you go.

http://www.thorshield.com/
http://www.thorshield.com/prod01.htm

G2 sells ONLY to jackboots, don't even try any funny biz with em, cause they're a buncha law and order bootlickers of the Erik Prince stripe and would prolly whine about you to homeland security... nice to know we don't live in a police state, eh ?
*SNARK!*

But contrary to their opinion that they're the only source of such material, they ain't.

And one AGAIN the whole class-war issue rears it's head here, doesn't it ?

Only the Lords are allowed to defend themselves against such things, us Peons better bend the knee, or else.... fuck em, the REAL free market operates without regard to silly things like laws and regulations, and always has.

For myself, I wonder just how many of you on the other side of the screen are currently smoking cigarettes smuggled to avoid henious tax practices, or would be, if you only had the contacts.

Commerce Continues - it's a law of nature and society, even amongst subsentient primates.

Anyhow, this stuff'll be flooding the market soon, in direct response to police abuse of the device, and yeah, I know, it's gonna find it's way into the hands of some crooks, but it's gonna do that ANYWAY, just like guns do, ok ?

How long you think it's gonna be before criminals figure out they can dodge a firearms rap by zapping you out with a taser, jacking your stuff and getting in the wind, since it's non-lethal and all... your life wasn't in danger, right ?

Crooks are stupid, true, but like all humans they DO learn and adapt, if slowly - to ignore that fact is to ignore reality.

So a fighting chance is on the way, give it time.. folks gotta get it to the "market" in ways that don't lead back to them, cause nobody involved wants a buncha hyped up rocket jock no-knock jackboots kickin in their door at 3am, right ?

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
The UN based on bad science, halted the use of the most effective insecticide(DDT) to prevent the "Malaria vector"(Mosquito)for 30 years. Maybe "killing" is to harsh, would you prefer negligent homicide.

That was the UN's program to begin with. So you're actually upset with their lack of meddling...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:

Citizen:
After having read some of your posts I will readily concede that you are probably more intelligent and articulate than myself. Having said that, If you chose to talk down to me, or badmouth my country again, I promise name calling will in-sue.

Calm down man. I wasn't badmouthing your country, if you notice what I wrote, I was bad mouthing your government, not your country. Also what I said was more flippant than anything else, how you read into it to the point that I was talking down to you is beyond me, it certainly wasn't as it was meant. However, frankly the US governments international meddling is at least on a par with the UN's, so it seems a mite unfair to be trashing the UN, then demanding an appology for pointing out the US governments own faults in that area.

As for you Jack, your continued intolerance for any other point of view bores me, feel free to continue to be a rabid fascist, but please leave me out of it. I have no concern whether you ignore me or not, I have nothing to learn from you anyway, but keep your ussual self righteous baiting and trolling behaviour to your self.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Frem's entire post

Sweet.... figured it was out there already or it was comming soon. Ima have to get me some of that. Sure the price is uber high right now if I can find it though.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:46 PM

I love you Cit.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 1:48 AM

Good for you. I don't hate you Jack, I just get fed up with the way you conduct yourself sometimes.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 2:51 AM

Stuff like this.. ridiculous...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07254/816402-153.stm

But there was something about this naggin the crap out of me last night, and I chewed on it mentally a while, and for my conscience, I gotta point this one out to ya.

Something y'all need to think about, and think hard, before you walk into something you may not be prepared for.

Thing is, one has to explore the legal and real world ramifications of what to do NEXT, if you should have your browncoat lined with the stuff like mine is.

Now mind you, I have a valid excuse, given my employment, you understand, that and a somewhat battered second-chance IIA which serves dual purpose as crash protection as well as defensively, not to mention it gets freakin COLD up here and my skinny ass can use the extra layers.

But what you need to think about, is that when officer unfriendly hands out the zap, and you DON'T go down - he's gonna escalate it.

Are you prepared for that ?

What do you mean to do ABOUT it ?

Look, even if you are wholly in the right, legally and from a self-defense standpoint, if you cap an officer, even one bent on your imminent homicide, the rest of the force WILL do their level best to kill you, and even if they don't you can be absolutely assured that you'll be beaten bloody and thrown in the tank for further abuse, or relegated to a nice private cell you can "commit suicide" in.

IF you survive that, you're still looking down the twin barrels of continual harrassment (see also: Brent Darrow)
http://nwi.com/interact/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=18674

And massive legal bills, bail, and quite possibly asset forfeiture if they wanna play hardball.
(see also: Dean Koontz: Dark Rivers of the Heart)

And if, by some miracle chance you come out the other end in one piece, still employed with a survivable income, you'll still have to look over your shoulder for the rest of your life.

The best answer to it is what Me, Leadb, Anthony and many others are saying, is to address and correct the issue before it comes to do or die.

It's all well and good to ponder applying such a thing defensively, but you better damned well consider the whole picture and potential ramifications in advance rather than being caught out like a deer in the headlights with a police 9mm para headed for your center of mass.

Just sayin, think it THROUGH before you DO, ok ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 3:09 AM

That's a great message Frem, and certainly one that I didn't consider before you posted it. Thanks for the warning.

Still, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have this type of protection under your sleeve, or shirt as it were, when that rapist or mugger gets his hands on one of these things. Good point somebody (maybe you) made above that criminals are probably even more likely to use this than a gun because you can't fight back while they gank your shit and they're under the belief that you won't die from the tazer so they won't get an attempted murder rap should they be apprehended.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 11:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:

Citizen:
After having read some of your posts I will readily concede that you are ________ more intelligent and articulate than myself. Having said that, If you chose to talk down to me, or badmouth my country again, I promise name calling will in-sue.
Edited:(removed probably)
Calm down man. I wasn't badmouthing your country, if you notice what I wrote, I was bad mouthing your government, not your country. Also what I said was more flippant than anything else, how you read into it to the point that I was talking down to you is beyond me, it certainly wasn't as it was meant. However, frankly the US governments international meddling is at least on a par with the UN's, so it seems a mite unfair to be trashing the UN, then demanding an appology for pointing out the US governments own faults in that area.

I don't know were you got the idea I was asking for an apology. I was simply making an idle threat(because that's what we do). Your response was interesting. I had no idea that there are people who hold such allegiance to the UN. Where I come from its pretty safe to trash the UN, and the French of coarse(pre-Sarkozy). Another thing that is confusing to me is why you would think it's better to trash the US government. I'm sure your aware that the US is a Democratic Republic and therefore the people and the government are equally culpable for any misdeeds.

I also took the time to read more of your posts and as a result have edited the "probably" from my previous post.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 12:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
I don't know were you got the idea I was asking for an apology. I was simply making an idol threat(because that's what we do).

Yeah, I realised it was an imperfect statement when I made it.

Quote:
Your response was interesting. I had no idea that there are people who hold such allegiance to the UN.

I don't hold allegiance to the UN, I do however think it's unfair to trash the UN for causing pain and suffering through it's meddling, when it's not particularly extraordinary in that regard. Yeah, I picked on the US somewhat, perhaps unfairly but I think it's a valid comparison. I could pick on France, Russia, or the UK as easily. How many have died in the US/Russia cold war interventions? How many died when France just couldn't accept that it's imperial rule in Indochina was over and continued to fight on in the region? How many died when that conflict morphed into a cold war game between the US and Russia? Afghanistan in the 80's?

In the wash, I think the world has been somewhat improved for the UN. Perhaps they could have done more with Malaria, but it's hardly their meddling that caused Malaria, the UN's intervention, if anything had a positive impact on the situation.

Quote:
Another thing that is confusing to me is why you would think it's better to trash the US government. I'm sure your aware that the US is a Democratic Republic and therefore the people and the government are equally culpable for any misdeeds.

Indeed, and I tend to hold myself accountable for the actions of my government to some degree. But I don't think it's fair to characterise a criticism of the US Government or its foreign policy as an attack on the American people, it's country or it's ideals. It's how genuine criticism gets characterised as anti-Americanism. I in fact have no love for most of the US governments foreign policy, but I don't necessarily think that reflects on to the American people.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 26, 2007 6:17 PM