View Full Version : One for the anti-Taser brigade.
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 08:29
And some want the police to carry arms.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1500913&objectid=10411372
Not only did this clown zap himself, he missed and hit an innocent party x 2
Skyryder
Patrick
26th December 2006, 08:46
repost... and it was in the Harold... hmmmmmm......
and it happened months ago... if it actually happened...
John Banks
26th December 2006, 15:12
Let's take a look at that:
"Mr Hollewand said the officer claimed that just as the red laser sight was on the man's chest, he pulled his son across him."
Right. Must be a clown who can't use a taser.
"The constable did remove one of the cartridges before a five-second discharge cycle was complete and he did feel in his hand that the device was arcing 50,000 volts."
Because in the middle of fighting in a violent incident, you really need to stop and count "One one thousand, two one thousand..." If you're a bit quick with trying to reload when someone's trying to bash you, you must be a clown.
All it goes to show is that the taser would have been pulled out in a hectic situation, and anyone that blocks a taser with his own son needs to have his balls removed.
Swoop
26th December 2006, 16:35
Also pepperspraying a person unintentionally.
This guy wasn't having a good day at the office...
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 16:45
Let's take a look at that:
"Mr Hollewand said the officer claimed that just as the red laser sight was on the man's chest, he pulled his son across him."
Right. Must be a clown who can't use a taser.
"The constable did remove one of the cartridges before a five-second discharge cycle was complete and he did feel in his hand that the device was arcing 50,000 volts."
Because in the middle of fighting in a violent incident, you really need to stop and count "One one thousand, two one thousand..." If you're a bit quick with trying to reload when someone's trying to bash you, you must be a clown.
All it goes to show is that the taser would have been pulled out in a hectic situation, and anyone that blocks a taser with his own son needs to have his balls removed.
Yes they do need their balls removed, but still does not excuse the cop for hitting the wrong target not once but twice. And some fuckers want to arm the police. First ruyle of firearm training.........get a clear shot. If the cop could not handle the situation he should have retreated until backup arrived. But methinks the adrenalin rush got going and 'fuck one fuck all, this fuckers not fucking me.' Zap zzzzzzzaaaaaaaapppppppp.
Skyryder
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 16:50
You have no idea what your talking about. Stick to keeping your head in the clouds skyrider :done:
So tell me how you miss twice with a Taser and pepper spray. I wouldn't arm this fucker with a pop gun.
Skyryder
stanko
26th December 2006, 17:12
First ruyle of firearm training.........get a clear shot.
Skyryder
When I went to how to shoot things school the First rule was to "Identify the target". You just make up the rules as you go, should get involved in politics, maybe as the the mininster of spontanious laws.
Who really cares how many people were shot with non leathal weapons. I think they should be gratefull, something to tell their mates at school, or later when they go to prison.
marty
26th December 2006, 17:19
You have no idea what your talking about. Stick to keeping your head in the clouds skyrider :done:
i concur. skyrider seems to be more and more like a troll every day. i think he needs to get out more. i doubt whether he's ever had to make a decision under pressure in his life
StoneChucker
26th December 2006, 17:22
I personally believe that if you attack a police officer, you deserve whatever you get. If you use your children as shields, then logic only says the shield will get hit. And as for missing with pepper spray, if you discharge that in a room, everyone in the room is going to get a small taste of it. The 21 yr old probably sensed a trace of it in the air and went to town like the pansy football players do when they get bumped or even looked at...
What about the fact that it was all about the mongrel who was probably bashing up his wife and kids, and his kids kids, and their kids, and aunty and nana and cousins... oh, and the cop... but yeah, the important thing to focus on is the taser and pepper spray...
RT527
26th December 2006, 17:43
Mind you the guy did give himself up in the end.....
Prolly from laughing so hard he had the stitch and couldnt run
SwanTiger
26th December 2006, 19:50
My opinion after reading the article is that the Herald staff have knowingly manipulated the facts to purposely make the story sound more interesting and left the reader making assumptions.
The New Zealand Herald is an collaboration of spin doctors, not intelligent journalist.
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 21:09
My opinion after reading the article is that the Herald staff have knowingly manipulated the facts to purposely make the story sound more interesting and left the reader making assumptions.
So how were the facts 'purposedly manipulated to make the story sound more interesting? What facts were manipulated and what assumptions could the reader make from these 'manipulated facts'?
Skyryder
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 21:13
i concur. skyrider seems to be more and more like a troll every day. i think he needs to get out more. i doubt whether he's ever had to make a decision under pressure in his life
If you can not control other people in a 'situation' control yourself. By controling yourself you will not make mistakes. Think about that Marty.
Skyryder
Skyryder
26th December 2006, 21:20
Tell you? why? whats the point?
Because if you could you would make it.
Skyryder
Lou Girardin
27th December 2006, 06:09
How interesting that the cops and pro-cops just attack skyrider on his post. Could that be because the cop actions in question are indefensible?
I fail to see how the cop would think of using the taser when the offenders son was withing arms reach anyway. Then to spray the daughter as well!
It sounds like several months re-training is required.
spudchucka
27th December 2006, 08:03
How interesting that the cops and pro-cops just attack skyrider on his post. Could that be because the cop actions in question are indefensible?
No!
Its because all the whinging cop haters on this site, (and elsewhere), have no actual knowledge of the matters they bleat on about and rely on inaccurate media representation of events as the basis of their opinions.
Toaster
27th December 2006, 08:08
Who really cares how many people were shot with non leathal weapons. I think they should be gratefull, something to tell their mates at school, or later when they go to prison.
Preach it brother!!
Toaster
27th December 2006, 08:11
No!
Its because all the whinging cop haters ... rely on inaccurate media representation of events as the basis of their opinions.
I agree! Seems some are very quick to believe the tripe written in the newspapers as 'fact' when it reality, cops and ex cops know damn well that the 'facts' as reported are often inaccurate and sensationalised to make the police look bad and sell papers.
scumdog
27th December 2006, 08:17
We need to shoot a lot more offenders - then the ones pepper-sprayed or Tazered will be grateful that's all they got.....
Maha
27th December 2006, 08:18
No!
Its because all the whinging cop haters on this site, (and elsewhere), have no actual knowledge of the matters they bleat on about and rely on inaccurate media representation of events as the basis of their opinions.
A very good point spudchucka, why the hell has this not been posted before?
Swan Tiger said something similar in an earlier post and you have capped it off nicely..........:yes:
I remember years ago, an article on TV about Jo/Burg?? (S.A)
Reporters had nothing to report, so they threw some coins into a trash can and the children all dived in to grad the 'loot'. That was the que to start filming and report on the desperation to survive as young children fight over whatever they could find in rubbish bins....Media Manipulation?.... i think so..:done:
Skyryder
27th December 2006, 15:40
No!
Its because all the whinging cop haters on this site, (and elsewhere), have no actual knowledge of the matters they bleat on about and rely on inaccurate media representation of events as the basis of their opinions.
So far no one has explained how this guy missed twice with a tazor, spiked himself, and pepper sprayed the daughter. All we get is that it is the media's fault, you weren't there etc, and excuses.
Skyryder
doc
27th December 2006, 16:02
You dont place your life on the line and you obviously have no idea how dangerous and fluid situations can be in the Police including this one.
If you are talking fact here why the hell do it for 40 grand ? They accept police experience in Iraq don't they ? You are taking some ones bait over a notorius piece of crap ( NZ Herald) that doesn't know what a facts is.
NighthawkNZ
27th December 2006, 17:42
We need to shoot a lot more offenders - then the ones pepper-sprayed or Tazered will be grateful that's all they got.....
Hear here hair
:yes:
Lou Girardin
27th December 2006, 20:02
No!
Its because all the whinging cop haters on this site, (and elsewhere), have no actual knowledge of the matters they bleat on about and rely on inaccurate media representation of events as the basis of their opinions.
Could that be because your bosses prevaricate, obfuscate and just plain lie?
"Cop haters" is an easy dismissal, but you know as well as i do that true cop haters are quite rare, most people just want honesty and accountability in return for their trust.
Lou Girardin
27th December 2006, 20:39
What a load of rubbish. Of course there are one dimensional cop haters..theres loads of them out there.
I should have said, "on this site".
RT527
27th December 2006, 20:46
I agree! Seems some are very quick to believe the tripe written in the newspapers as 'fact' when it reality, cops and ex cops know damn well that the 'facts' as reported are often inaccurate and sensationalised to make the police look bad and sell papers.
I `ll give you an example.....I went to a mva once that involved a truck and a car.....read the next day in the paper....Truck hits car on the straights before Ngatea.....when in fact it was the car who crossed the centre line and hit The truck...... So why do they report it that way round and potentially ruin a drivers life....because it sells papers.
James Deuce
27th December 2006, 20:48
The do the same with bike accidents.
scumdog
28th December 2006, 00:42
So far no one has explained how this guy missed twice with a tazor, spiked himself, and pepper sprayed the daughter. All we get is that it is the media's fault, you weren't there etc, and excuses.
Skyryder
So far you haven't explained why you are touting this information as if it were 'fact'.
Where DID you get this 'information'? from a reliable source?
NighthawkNZ
28th December 2006, 00:46
So far no one has explained how this guy missed twice with a tazor, spiked himself, and pepper sprayed the daughter. All we get is that it is the media's fault, you weren't there etc, and excuses.
Shit do you believe everything you read, hear and see by the media...
Lou Girardin
28th December 2006, 05:53
I really love the way some people refer to "the media" as the source of all evil. Heard of shooting the messenger?
It seems to be a NZ sport, started by politicians and picked up by those caught out hiding the truth.
One thing is for sure, without the media, the world would be a very different place. Arthur Alan Thomas would still be in jail for just one example.
The trouble with NZ media is that they're often lazy rather than dishonest.
But it's not called the Fourth Estate for nothing.
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 05:56
So far you haven't explained why you are touting this information as if it were 'fact'.
Where DID you get this 'information'? from a reliable source?
Detective Inspector Bernie Hollewand of Auckland City police confirmed that the constable fired the Taser five times - three times loaded with cartridges and twice in "contact" mode, where it is used like a cattle prod. The first shot hit the son.
Skyryder
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 06:03
So far no one has explained how this guy missed twice with a tazor, spiked himself, and pepper sprayed the daughter. All we get is that it is the media's fault, you weren't there etc, and excuses.
Skyryder
There's only one person who could explain it and so far it doesn't appear that they are a member yet.
Take the media reports as being a lose representation of what might have happened only, they can't even get direct quotes of police supplied media releases right.
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 06:05
most people just want honesty and accountability in return for their trust.
But they trust the media and they are the biggest bullshit artists around, go figure?
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 06:10
Shit do you believe everything you read, hear and see by the media...
So tell me where I can find some evidence that disputes what I have posted.
So far no one has been able to. All I get is, 'I' was not there and statements in the manner of what you have written NH
Without any reliable evidence to the contrary I like many others in this country have only the media for information. There are remedies that indavidulas can take if the media makes statements that are grossly untrue.
I am unaware of any that the police or other indaviduals have taken against the Herald or the reporter who wrote the story
If you have information to the contrary where is it??
Skyryder
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 06:17
Detective Inspector Bernie Hollewand of Auckland City police confirmed that the constable fired the Taser five times - three times loaded with cartridges and twice in "contact" mode, where it is used like a cattle prod. The first shot hit the son.
Skyryder
Lets see Inspector Hollewand's actual media release.
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 06:22
I really love the way some people refer to "the media" as the source of all evil. Heard of shooting the messenger?
It seems to be a NZ sport, started by politicians and picked up by those caught out hiding the truth.
One thing is for sure, without the media, the world would be a very different place. Arthur Alan Thomas would still be in jail for just one example.
The trouble with NZ media is that they're often lazy rather than dishonest.
But it's not called the Fourth Estate for nothing.
It is interesting to note that where the media reports something that indaviduals support or generaly agree with (for whatever reason) there is never any doubt as to the stories accuracy. It is only when a story appears that is critical in some way to an indaviduals ethics etc. that the integrity of the source is bought into doubt, not the facts as reported.
Skyryder
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 06:23
Without any reliable evidence to the contrary I like many others in this country have only the media for information.
Dissregarding this matter, you have a number of cops on this forum who regularly offer up the truth regarding police related issues and yet you and others of a similar mindset simply choose to dismiss our explanations as if we are just brainwashed employees towing the company line. Nothing could be further from the truth!
Why aren't we believed? Because the truth we provide doesn't match the preconcieved notions you hold about the police, you simply don't want to face up to the truth.
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 06:26
It is interesting to note that where the media reports something that indaviduals support or generaly agree with (for whatever reason) there is never any doubt as to the stories accuracy. It is only when a story appears that is critical in some way to an indaviduals ethics etc. that the integrity of the source is bought into doubt, not the facts as reported.
Skyryder
When you see the media fuck up as much as we do you learn to take all news reporting with a grain of salt.
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 06:36
Lets see Inspector Hollewand's actual media release.
Let's see an official denial of the story. No one has denied that this incident did not occure and innocent parties were assaulted. That's the issue. Spud.
Skyryder
Toaster
28th December 2006, 09:30
So why do they report it that way round and potentially ruin a drivers life....because it sells papers.
Yeah they don't care about the truth, only about profit. It annoys me how so many people just take what the media says as gospel.
scumdog
28th December 2006, 09:37
It is interesting to note that where the media reports something that indaviduals support or generaly agree with (for whatever reason) there is never any doubt as to the stories accuracy. It is only when a story appears that is critical in some way to an indaviduals ethics etc. that the integrity of the source is bought into doubt, not the facts as reported.
Skyryder
The longer I'm in this job the less I beleive what the media say - I have seen so many straight out cock-ups by them as well as sensationalism "Dollar reaches 70 cents US - We're all over the hill to the poor house" etc.
I have explained incidents to the media using words of only two sylables yet they still have details like the vehicles were travelling in the opposite direction, the wrong car crossing the centr-line and the wrong drivers for each car, the list is so long you would find it hard to comprehend how they do it.
Now I just leave it to somebody else to inform the papers etc - just can't be bothered any more. (and yes, the media still screw up the info).
Hell, even their weather forecasts don't pan out!!!
scumdog
28th December 2006, 09:41
Let's see an official denial of the story. No one has denied that this incident did not occure and innocent parties were assaulted. That's the issue. Spud.
Skyryder
Because the incident falls into the "who cares" catagory??
Could have happened as you believe (pffft!) or could have NOT happened as you believe.
So what? Nobody is perfect (You lot don't pay 'perfection' money, in fact it would be more in the 'mediocraty' level of pay).
NighthawkNZ
28th December 2006, 10:59
Hell, even their weather forecasts don't pan out!!!
looks out the window... :( tell me about it
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 12:27
Yep the merry go round is still going 'round. No one has offered any alternitive evidence to the story. In a the absence of this is it not resonable to 'assume' the the stories facts as reported are correct.
For those who disagree well that's your perogative, all I can say is that if the police ever become permently armed on the streets I can just see some of you rushing to become this guys partner. If so I'd double your life insurance.
I'm jumping off the merry go round, it's stopped.
Skyryder
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 15:41
Let's see an official denial of the story. No one has denied that this incident did not occure and innocent parties were assaulted. That's the issue. Spud.
Skyryder
Why would they deny it when they have already acknowleged the incident?
I don't know anything about the incident, if its in the news and the Inspector has acknowleged something happened then lets just accept that something happened and drop the subject, shit happens, deal with it.
If the cop is the complete incompetant that the story makes him out to be then it is really a supervisory issue in that an incompetant was put into a situation like that in the first place.
But lets not lose sight of the fact that we haven't heard any explanation yet, (as far as I'm aware). Was the guy attempting to use the taser while the shit bags bull terrier was latched onto his balls, was he outnumbered and being assaulted by the whole family? Who would know? I don't and I'm damn sure you don't either.
spudchucka
28th December 2006, 15:43
I have explained incidents to the media using words of only two sylables yet they still have details like the vehicles were travelling in the opposite direction, the wrong car crossing the centr-line and the wrong drivers for each car, the list is so long you would find it hard to comprehend how they do it.
You can even give it to them in writing and they still screw up.
Lou Girardin
29th December 2006, 06:14
Dissregarding this matter, you have a number of cops on this forum who regularly offer up the truth regarding police related issues and yet you and others of a similar mindset simply choose to dismiss our explanations as if we are just brainwashed employees towing the company line. Nothing could be further from the truth!
Why aren't we believed? Because the truth we provide doesn't match the preconcieved notions you hold about the police, you simply don't want to face up to the truth.
The trouble with this spud, is that many of you also do not know the truth. Just because your bosses say something is true, does not mean it is. (Unless you have direct access to research, that is)
spudchucka
29th December 2006, 06:33
The trouble with this spud, is that many of you also do not know the truth. Just because your bosses say something is true, does not mean it is. (Unless you have direct access to research, that is)
Did you ever stop to think that we might be speaking from experience? You seem to just expect that anything we say in defence of the police is due to brainwashing.
Skyryder
29th December 2006, 07:33
Did you ever stop to think that we might be speaking from experience? You seem to just expect that anything we say in defence of the police is due to brainwashing.
No one is claiming that you should not defend yourselves. But defend your arguements with some kind some kind of evidence. I quoted from a paper that may or may not have been true. I asked for some kind kind of evidence to support your claims that there was 'doubt etc' from what the Heald reported. None was forthcoming. All that came was opinions. This thread has shown that where no counter arguement can be given, generalisations and inuendo suffice.
Skyryder
scumdog
29th December 2006, 08:59
This thread has shown that where no counter arguement can be given, generalisations and inuendo suffice.
Skyryder
See, that's the difference between 'them' and 'us' - we would only counter any claims with facts, if we can't get any then we will only (at worst) offer opinion - rather than attack with generalisation, inuendo and outright fabrication :yes:
Littleman
29th December 2006, 09:05
No one is claiming that you should not defend yourselves. But defend your arguements with some kind some kind of evidence. I quoted from a paper that may or may not have been true. I asked for some kind kind of evidence to support your claims that there was 'doubt etc' from what the Heald reported. None was forthcoming. All that came was opinions. This thread has shown that where no counter arguement can be given, generalisations and inuendo suffice.
Skyryder
Skyryder, in law when one makes an allegation the onus is on them is to prove it. You raised this issue and expect/demand everyone else to do the homework to 'disprove it'.
A bit like me saying I've travelled to the moon and then saying...."well you guys prove that I didn't".
Your housewife-like piece of homework journalism/talkback rhetoric doesn't really cut the mustard on this one.
hey and remember guys.....Safer Communities Together:innocent:
spudchucka
29th December 2006, 09:23
No one is claiming that you should not defend yourselves. But defend your arguements with some kind some kind of evidence. I quoted from a paper that may or may not have been true. I asked for some kind kind of evidence to support your claims that there was 'doubt etc' from what the Heald reported. None was forthcoming. All that came was opinions. This thread has shown that where no counter arguement can be given, generalisations and inuendo suffice.
Skyryder
I'm not saying whether the event happened or not, I wasn't there. What I am saying is that media reports are notoriously unreliable and for that reason you should take these reports on face value only, accepting that there will be a lot more to the true account of the event and that relying solely on the media as a source of information will ensure that you never know the full story. Therefore, basing your opinions on media reports makes you a fool with a big mouth.
mangell6
29th December 2006, 11:35
The media is about selling, how can I "create" a headline that will cause people to read the article. Its about "conning people" think about FOX in the US.
Most people only read the first few paragraphs of an article which is why the "facts"and "quotes" are placed in the articles bottom half. I read two reports by the same media organisation about a motorcycle accident, they both read differently and they did contain "some" of the facts albeit different ones.
Media and a pound of salt always go hand in hand.
BTW There are lots of dodgy people and some of tem are our friends.
crash harry
29th December 2006, 16:25
My opinion after reading the article is that the Herald staff have knowingly manipulated the facts to purposely make the story sound more interesting and left the reader making assumptions.
The New Zealand Herald is an collaboration of spin doctors, not intelligent journalist.
Damn straight. I have more contempt for the press in this country than I have even for the polliticians. And that's a lot.
McJim
29th December 2006, 17:04
Buwahahaha - instead of a cop bashing thread it's turned into a media bashing thread - I love it!
Why do the media sensationalise something?
Coz the public won't buy it otherwise ergo - it's the genaral public's fault for not paying attention to the mundane truth.
Fuck - I really hate that general public - what a bunch of wankers.
Hahahahah :rofl:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.