[Ray Bradbury]

I saw a police documentary where a large guy armed with a machete was cornered and wasn't going to come quietly. But as soon as he saw the red dot on his chest he changed his mind. perfect example of how to use them.
Unfortunately YouTube is replete with examples showing police officers too fat to chase a suspect and using them unnecessarily.
British police tend to be a lot fitter than lard arsed American Chief Wiggum wannabees so hopefully this wouldnt happen as often.
Another point you dont see addressed is what does it do to an epileptic or cardiac problem sufferer?

[Steevee]

(Original post by Craig_D)
I can see that we disagree fundamentally on the levels of violence that the Police justifiably can use in certain situations, so I sadly doubt we would be able to reach middle ground. I agree that if a person is resisting then the Police can justifiably be forceful; if a person is violent then the Police can justifiably be violent in return. I cannot see the rationale for violence against the guy refusing to put clothes on, he wasn't fighting back. They should have made it clear to him that he had to get dressed or get arrested, then afterwards lead him off to the station (and if he resisted then use force). From what I could see they told him to get dressed, he refused, so they started beating the crap out of him. Similarly, the girl resisted and ran away so the Police would be justified in pursuing and using force, but the taser is a weapon designed to not only immobilise but also cause incredible pain, and against an unarmed girl I cannot see the justification (whether or not a tackle would be equally dangerous, he could have tried to grab her, and if he couldn't outrun her in order to do that then I have to question whether he's fit to be an officer). The Police - especially in the US - seem to have a 'Do as we say, or we'll punish you with pain' mentality which I just cannot stomach; it's not the role of the Police to punish, despite what they think.

The one with the naked guy, I can see is certainly debatable, I personally think they should have simply arrested him, or left the beating and used the Tazer, as whilst the Taser is painfully, it is harmless and leaves no long term affects so there is no issue behind the use of force and personal consequences. I feel if someone is refusing officers, of course arrest should be the first priority, but if that arrest is morelikely to hurt a person than immobilising them first, then Taze away.

The woman, again, there is no argument really. You've got someone on Oxy and Coke, resisting arrest. The cop, being 3 times her size almost certainly would have injured her tackling her, and I'd rather her in the state she ended up to on the streets. As I said before, the Taser, though painful, has no long term affects and is shaken off within seconds, what happened to the woman was unfortunate, but not the fault of the officer.

[metalthrashin'mad]

I think that tasers should be used in football. For all the girly pricks who dive around everywhere. If they get up within a minute and carry on playing, having shook off something they were rolling around for they should get tased for being a ****ing pussy.

The referee should also be allowed to taze players for dissent and swearing.

[Kiss]

(Original post by Steevee)
The use of the Taser was perfectly justified in that instance. The woman was high on Coke and Oxy and already running toward a busy main street, the cop was 3 times her size so the standard tackle would have put her in as much danger as the Taser ever would have. The way she fell was unfortunate, but the use of the Taser was perfectly justified.

Isn't what you just said the top comment for that video?

[llessur123]

(Original post by MagicNMedicine)

I'm curious as to why me being tased is worthy of a sex face...

[Annoying-Mouse]

The vast majority of areas in the UK won't need police with tasers. However, high-crime areas with gangs and whatnot should do a little experiment with them and see what they do. If they don't do anything to help crime or catch criminals then scrap them. Police should only be given lethal force when needed.

[hamijack]

(Original post by Steevee)
Whilst the force at points, such as the cop dropping a knee onto the perp was not needed, I can;t object to the later use of the Taser. Whatever your feelings on the perp and situation, he was breaking the law and refusing to cooperate. The situation would have been better handled just putting him in cuffs, but if you willfully flout the law infront of Police, you probably deserve a little shock.

How was the use of the taser valid? He wasn't a threat to anyone and there were 3 police officers for the one suspect. They should have been able to subdue him without the use of a taser.

[Herr]

It isn't a bad idea for police to be armed with one, too many crooks these days carry knives and guns. For starters it should be noted that a taser is a non-lethal weapon, it has even been discharged on children in USA with no adverse effect. The only thing is I do think that it should be used very responsibly and as a last resort, also there should be public reports published on each discharge of it as to ensure it isn't used in a brutal way.

But I think it is better to go solve the causes of crimes rather than to fight crime.

[Ray Bradbury]

(Original post by hamijack)
How was the use of the taser valid? He wasn't a threat to anyone and there were 3 police officers for the one suspect. They should have been able to subdue him without the use of a taser.

Because they were three fat bloaters without and unblocked artery between them.
When you get to the size they are it is difficult to kneel down and grapple with somebody to get them in cuffs. They are an utter disgrace for law enforcement officers, no wonder they don't even like getting out of their cars.

[Steevee]

(Original post by hamijack)
How was the use of the taser valid? He wasn't a threat to anyone and there were 3 police officers for the one suspect. They should have been able to subdue him without the use of a taser.

And you saw the crowd reaction when they started twisting his arms to cuff him? Assuming he continues to resist, he could do himself a mischief. I don't agree with the way they handled it, but assuming they hadn't used the violent force they did, I would have been fine with them using a Taser on a subject that is flouting and resisting arrest, no matter how friendly they seem, is perfectly fine with me.

[KasanDude]

It's better to "tase" someone than to shoot them or let them get away...

[NewFolder]

I've seen quite a lot of officers in my area carrying tasers, I'd estimate about 30-60% of all the officers I've seen this year have them.

I don't think that tasers are a bad idea (when used correctly and legally ofc), but I don't think they need any more of them here, due to the fact that I have never seen an officer use one around here, as well as quite a low crime rate around here. From what I've seen at least, I think that buying more tasers would just be a waste of money, they are very rarely used from what I've seen.

However, I don't see officers from other areas on a regular basis, so I can't really comment on them. I think whether the police need more tasers depends on the how many tasers the force currently have, the crime rate of the area, and how of this crime involves guns, knives or other weapons.

For example, it might be a waste of money for a force based in a quiet rural village to have tasers - they would probably only be used a few times, if ever. However, if an area has a large amount of gun and knife crime, I think that every officer should be armed with a taser, for the safety of themselves and the general public.

[Converse Rocker]

Bad if you're on the receiving end...

[NewFolder]

(Original post by llessur123)
I think they are fine. A friend used to use hers on me all the time for "fun" when I wasn't expecting it (lol) and it wasn't painful, you just can't move.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Why does your friend have a taser?

[llessur123]

(Original post by NewFolder)
Why does your friend have a taser?

Her father is in the police so I'm assuming its his, who knows though they also own a shotgun..strange family.

[Sierra166]

"TASER's" are actually a brandname. They're a form of electroshock weapon made by TASER international. When fired and used, they actually use electric current to freeze up voluntary muscle control. Unless used in "drive stun" mode, they DO NOT use pain as their compliance technique. They deliver electric currents that disrupt the path between brain and muscle so you cannot physically move voluntarily. When used in drive stun mode then pain compliance is the main compliance technique, but people can work through the pain, especially when on intoxicants.

Other electroshock weapons, like stun guns use pain compliance, which are basically an electric cattle prod. This is why TASER is so popular, because it works on everyone and uses biology, not pain compliance to stop people. Their main concern in torture environments are when used in pain compliance mode, again why TASER is so popular (less likely unless used in drive stun).

A TASER device logs when and how long it is discharged, so it's not something that can be used whenever.

They are NOT NON-LETHAL, they are LESS-THAN-LETHAL. They can cause death as a result (one way or another) of their use (e.g. person locks up and drops to the floor, hitting their head on a curb).

My opinion:- When used to replace lethal force i.e. firearms or other less-lethal force e.g batons then they are great. However, when used on their own without justification, then I'm obviously against it.

Basically, if being carried by a Authorised or Specialist Firearms Officer then I'm fine with the issue, but I don't think they should be standard issue to non AFO/SFO's. Although, personally, I think there should be more AFO/SFO's in certain areas.

(Original post by NewFolder)
Why does your friend have a taser?

I'm guessing by the South African flag, she has one because she can. Different laws and cultures. If it was South Africa then I'm guessing it's for self-defence, where something a little more powerful is often used.

If it's in the UK then it's a section 5 firearm and is dealt with as such. Custodial sentencing is likely for possession.
-

[McMurdo]

(Original post by Bellissima)
bad, the UK shouldn't have them... i have no say in the laws of the USA so whatever.

How exactly are they bad? Is it because they hurt the poor criminal? You're right. We should apprehend criminals with ropes made from unicorn hair.

[fruit_n_veg]

Speaking as someone in the trade...

Despite what it may seem on the face of it, tasers are considered in the police Conflict Management Model (it's a multi stranded thing to actually give some context to the very wooly legal term of "reasonable force") as being a pretty low level response when using force, lower than incapacitant spray (some forces use CS spray, some use a variant of pepper spray, but all coppers carry some kind of spray) and a lot lower than the baton that coppers carry. This is because incapacitant sprays can cause skin complaints in some circumstances and have effects that can last up to 15 minutes (I can tell you that from experience it's really, really nasty).

Taser on the other hand, there is no lasting effects to the recipient beyond the moment being tased. I've been told by a taser trained officer that overall he'd rather be tased than be CS sprayed.

Regarding its use, it's pretty widespread use now and even in the news this week, the Metropolitan Police are planning to expand its deployment. Given the challenges that frontline police officers face on a daily basis and the fact that officers are routinely working on their own now more than ever, for me there is no question that it should be given to all.

I only work a small town so hardly some big urban ghetto, this didn't stop someone threatening me with a baseball bat at a domestic incident I attended recently. It wasn't pleasant by any stretch, luckily for me there was two of us. My only option to respond would have been with my baton which would've resulted in injury to the bloke with the baseball bat, as given it was close proximity and in a house, the CS spray wouldn't be an option. While some might say he deserves it, using that level of force gets a lot more scrutinised and if he were to die, while it would have been lawful (I can tell you I was ****ting myself) it would've resulted in many months of investigation and the loss of someone's life.

However balanced against this is the need for good training and monitoring of use. This would fit into the current system where use of CS spray/batons etc is annually refreshed and monitored for unsuitable use (and rightly so). If any copper can't safely and lawfully use a taser, then they'd have to be taken off the frontline until such time as they can and ultimately, may no longer be a copper if so. I've said it before, I'm no blind supporter of everything the police do but there has to at least be some trust that it will be right most of the time.

[Surfing_the_shine]

i think they are a good idea
but they are used beyond there neccessity, they only need stun people yet these are prolonged and people can die such as in the case of ralph moat and such individuals can never be brought to justice . this is espescially an issue for athiests