Tazers

**scumdog** · 7th June 2006, 14:06

Originally Posted by Pixie

Cops should have guns.
It's only the threat of killing someone that makes most cops think twice about using the gun as a coercive tool.
Non lethal weapons are too easily used to punish "contemp of cop" behaviour

Funny how only 'certain' people have that worry - never had any concerns about use of force being misused - even before I had this job and was just a low-life freezing worker, saw a few of my 'mates' get busted and shoved around, personally I thought they brought it on themselves.

Some people are born natural 'victims' - sometimes of their own mouths.

**scumdog** · 7th June 2006, 14:11

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Yeah the cops have sure proved that they're responsible enough to use pepper spray.?

Like the public proving they are responsible enough to drive, like politicians proving they are responsible enough to run a country yadda yadda yadda....

"Another fine non-sequitor"

**Coyote** · 7th June 2006, 16:22

Originally Posted by Skyryder

Guess the publicity blurbs have worked on you. Just do a web search and you will find how wrong you are.

Skyryder

I've been interested in tasers for a while and have been searching up info on them. They certainly lower a higher mortality rate than guns

**Sniper** · 7th June 2006, 16:26

Originally Posted by alarumba

They certainly have a higher mortality rate than guns

True, but that is because you can never gaurentee if the person has a pre existing medical condition or not. Frankly, if my life was in danger and they died cuase the shock was too much, I wouldnt give a fuck. If I zapped them cause they didnt comply, thats a different story.

**Colapop** · 7th June 2006, 16:28

Originally Posted by scumdog

Funny how only 'certain' people have that worry - never had any concerns about use of force being misused - even before I had this job and was just a low-life freezing worker, saw a few of my 'mates' get busted and shoved around, personally I thought they brought it on themselves.

Some people are born natural 'victims' - sometimes of their own mouths.

Also funny how 'some' people have an aversion to an DNA ID scheme.
The so-called 'human rights' activists should be placed in gen. pop. with some of the scumbags whose 'rights' they are trying to protect. Then we'll see how many of them change their tune. As far as I'm concerned if you commit a crime (bad enough to warrent imprisonment) you effectively waive your entitlement to the rights that everyday Joe Public has.

**Coyote** · 7th June 2006, 16:42

Originally Posted by Sniper

True, but that is because you can never gaurentee if the person has a pre existing medical condition or not. Frankly, if my life was in danger and they died cause the shock was too much, I wouldnt give a fuck. If I zapped them cause they didnt comply, thats a different story.

I have this medical condition where I bleed internally when a bullet goes through me. I however have been shocked with 100,000 volts and came away laughing (bad example, the shock went through my arm and caused no harm). If I was running around school with my grandads sawn off shotgun I inherited, I'd rather have a taser knock me down with the possibility of it killing me than be shot down in a shower of blood (actually, I'd rather be shot)

**Sniper** · 7th June 2006, 16:47

True, I have the same condition, but because of my South African blood, the being shot is more likely going to happen to me rather than you

**Coyote** · 7th June 2006, 16:51

True. I'm more likely to get myself killed than be killed

**Lou Girardin** · 7th June 2006, 17:18

Originally Posted by spudchucka

Correct. Or are you being facetious again?
Thanks, appreciate it.
Last night on campbell Live he denied that quote was his and says that it has been falsely attributed to him. He ensured Campbell that they would not be used for that purpose.
Any form of force used against a person has risks associated to it but the warnings are more to do with the companies need to protect itself from litigation.

Now spud, you know I have the utmost respect for your dedication and general level of professionalism.

But some of your colleagues have proved that they aren't fit to operate tricycles, let alone tasers. A good number can't even keep a cage on the road for God's sake. Even a few half-wits is enough to not take the risk of giving them semi-lethal weapons.

**Lou Girardin** · 7th June 2006, 17:19

Originally Posted by alarumba

I've been interested in tasers for a while and have been searching up info on them. They certainly have a higher mortality rate than guns

Whaaaat?

**Coyote** · 7th June 2006, 17:25

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Whaaaat?

lol?

Wait, is it lower mortality?

**scumdog** · 7th June 2006, 18:00

Originally Posted by alarumba

lol?

Wait, is it lower mortality?

Yep, the outcome with a gun is close to 90+% fatal, with tasers it's a shitload less (scientific measurement this 'shitload' eh?).

BTW The cops I went with in the USA reckoned the appearance of a taser at an incident quietened things down a great deal without it even being used - the low-lifes realised two things: (1) The cop would use it more readily than a firearm and (2) it was going to have an effect REGARDLESS of their motivation etc. and probably hurt a whole lot.

Saw the threat of it work real well in Las Vegas - never seen a 'big 'ol boy' back down so quick!!

If you got killed by a taser shock there is a good chance you had it coming.

**bugjuice** · 7th June 2006, 18:33

has anyone got the clip of the bull that was shown on the news? That was an eye opener for me.

personally, I'm for them. If the fuckers are warned that it's going to happen, and they still continue, then why dick around, just teach them. They won't do it again, and the wankers might actually think twice before causing grief again.

But, the clip of the bull being stung with one of these tazers... shittin 'ell.. a bull that would stop a speeding freight train, is just instantly dropped and vibrating on the floor like a dildo that's slipped out. Unbelievable. As soon as the tazer is off, it jumps back up, probably pretty pissed. Is it really necessary to have that much power running thru that it can drop a bull clean...???

**Skyryder** · 7th June 2006, 19:23

I can remember when speed cameras were first introduced into this country. The most blatent PR was that the areas were going to be marked. How long did that last. Now we have anothe PR job by the police on why tazers are being trialed. Give a couple of years and the public will so blase' the safe gurads will come off and the judges, just as they do now, will accept the officers word over the victims.

They are in my opinion a torture device and as such have no place in New Zealand.

Skyryder