OH yeah, this keeps on rollin’.
So have y’all mothafuckaz checked this shit yet? I posted the article on my Facebook, and the discussion got very saucy.
Personally, right to bear arms be damned, I would like to see tasers banned in the USA. For civilians AND for LEOs. They’re not “weapons.” They’re tiny torture devices that work with only middling reliability on the target. I’ve been tased with a strong fucking stun gun – yeh, it rattled my teeth for about 10 seconds, but it didn’t “put me out of the fight.” At no point in law enforcement personnel’s ladder of Escalation Of Force should an option be a device that can kill (if you have a medical condition) unexpectedly. No. Fuck tasers. Any situation law enforcement or a civilian can get into that requires that particular device can arguably be solved with the use of a baton, or a fucking stiff kick in the balls. They’re horrible shit.
And now, Hanzel Und Getyl, because YEAH DAMN RIGHT. Whatever they’re singing about.
“Ich bin der Kraut mit der grossem Schnitzel”
I can’t tell if it’s my shitty German or that’s the actual lyric… either way, new band for me!
Also, do you ship stuff to Switzerland? Want to do a twolumps/F2F buy 😀
I’m expecting a shotgun being pumped over the phone(or any loud, easily recognizable firearm action sound).
For who it is for is a different question.
I wonder how far Alex can push her .22….
I’m guessing at least three inches. How much further depends how much time she’s willing to spend getting shit out of the screws around the trigger guard afterwards.
A Taser is not a “stun gun”. Not the same things.
It CAN be used as one, but that is not it’s main function.
You experienced a stun gun, a vastly different tool than a Taser (and a toolunused by almost all police departments for the very readons you mentioned). But a Taser WILL end a fight, faster than a pistol and with far less consequences. It doesn’t use pain, it overrides large areas of muscles (painfully). Stun guns just hurt a tiny area and can’t override muscles in any meaningful way.
That’s their designed role. Pistol alternative. Cops fuck this up by using them as alternatives to pepper spray, tactics, talking, bribing with food and all the other things that they can think of. They do this with pepper spray and raids and handcuffs too – that stuff should be used maybe five percent as often as it is.
I still have flashbacks and bad dreams from being tased. Longest five seconds of my life. But I never used it on anything but the office chair we used for target practice. But I would gladly swap a Taser out for and handgun situation I ever find myself in, be it as weilder or target. Tasers won’t crack my spine, puncture my heart or be negated by body armor.
TL;DR – the cops are the problem; not their tools.
/resigned a couple years after they started passing out Tasers. Never used on on any living thing because I paid attention to the “pistol alternative” rule and took it seriously. Guess I wasn’t in tune with policing trends, but I sleep a lot better than I would if I had been someone that used such equipment.
….and there’s the case of the cop who meant to go for his Taser, and instead pulled his pistol and capped an unarmed guy.
Such cops need their own das Boot to der Kopf.
Issue Tsaers to celebs for paparazzi control though. Those paparazzi are dangerous, you know. Just ask Princess Di… Oh no wait, you can’t, cause she was killed by a stupid paparazzi.
Issue Tasers to celebs for paparazzi control
I, for one, love this idea.
Bear spray.
More entertaining.
Several paparazzi. Let’s not stop at punishing just one for that killing. Use the tasers to incapacitate the paparazzi long enough for you to administer the bear spray rectally.
“Issue tsars to celebs for … ” Let me re-read that. Heh. Btw, it’s a Stiefel, not a Boot. Ein Boot is exactly what it sounds like: a boat. Das Boot is The Boat (and everyone who ever uploaded a clip of some fool drinking a yard of ale and called it “Das Boot” ought to be tasered too).
Nasty. o.O
Let’s make it happen! 😀
To be fair, she was killed by her drunk-driving driver/guard. The Paps certainly deserve to be tazered until they have no bowel control, but they’re no excuse to be driving 100mph in an urban area.
They are if you’re trying to get the fuck away from them and they don’t have the goddamn common sense to back the fuck off and realize that they’re not wanted.
That’s still no excuse to be driving too fast.
Seemed apropos:
Going to jump on the “disagree” bandwagon re: tasers. Both a swift kick and a baton violate the 20 foot rule. A Taser does not. Without violating that, cops have two choices: tasers, or lethal force. Yeah, maybe a taser would cause death, but it’s less likely to be lethal than getting shot.
And a baton can certainly kill or maim – With greter frequency than tasers do.
IMHO a taser is better then being shot with a gun.
Only if you don’t have a heart condition, or some other condition which would fuck you up lethally. Or if you don’t crack your skull when the Taser jolt causes you to fall. Or if the cop doesn’t mistake his gun for his Taser and caps you in the head. Or…..
See, most of those things the person about to be tased would know about; presumeably if you have a heart condition and a cop tells you to get on the ground or get tased you know you better do it or you might die. So if used properly in the right circumstances by the police I have no sympathy for the person being tased, the problem for me lies in that I don’t trust police to behave or correctly assess their options 100% of the time.
the only reason cops use tasers/stun guns is they used cattle prods on the protesters in the ’60’s, and they WORKED. same thing with fire hoses, which are used internationally on rowdy protesters, and they work.
can’t have a cop using something that works, right? because RACIST! so we give them a supposedly “not-a-cattle-prod” taser. that doesn’t usually work besides pissing someone off. so they have to shoot the now pissed off guy they were trying to subdue.
No the problem with tasers is that cops confuse the muscle reaction that happen as the person is still coming for them. Look at all the taser video where the cop states that the person was not on the ground. The individual was not on the ground because their muscles locked into place. The other thing that is ridiculous is when a cop Tases someone that is already on the ground. The cop would never shoot someone that was already down on the ground, but they think nothing of tasing someone.
Another problem with Tasers is that spell check does not recognize the word, but the suggestions are kind of funny.
“The cop would never shoot someone that was already down on the ground”
Maybe not in Dallas or even New York, but if it’s the Met and SO19, I wouldn’t count on that … and I’m not even Brazilian!
Called the ‘Yelling’ bit. Missed the call on Mick being smart enough to confess right up front.
What the others said about Tasers vs. Stun Guns. Significant difference in function.
Agree. Ban em for the PD. cops seem all too quick to reach for these “compliance devices”.
Every ‘less lethal’ device has this problem – Cops will experiment with them, push boundaries, and mis-apply them in any way they can manage and get away with. It’s human nature.
Rather than removing the tool, they need to start treating the tool like any other use of deadly force – Manditory reviews after weapons use, including time at a desk shuffling paper whilst the review is in progress. Make it ENTIRELY clear that careers ride on the outcome of the review. It’s not the tool’s fault – and banning tasers smacks ENTIRELY of the same magical thinking that leads folks to want to ban firearms. OK, so you remove the tool from the hands of police – What comes next? The exact same behaviors, using a different tool. Discipline and accountability are what’s called for here, not blame placed on an inanimate object.
If we follow this path, we’re actually justifying the Gun Grabber’s central thesis – That banning a tool will improve human nature and behavior. It won’t. So why are we jumping on that bandwagon..?!
Knock it off, folks. Stop using magical thinking. Start using critcal thinking.
>:(
Very good points. That suggestion would definitely limit some of the more egregious uses of Tasers.
Bear in mind, this happened in Ontario, Canada just north of Toronto. My good friend is epileptic. He had a seizure pulling his car into the driveway of the home he shared with his parents (cuz of his epilepsy, he hadn’t had a seizure in six months and was thus ok to drive by law, and this ended that.) The cops fucking tazed him because he drove the car into the ditch by his driveway due to the seizure, after he had passed out, but before the muscle spasms had stopped, because he was quote “not responding to commands dully issued by officers of the law” and then when his mom came out to ask the cops just what the fuck they were doing, tazing her seizing son instead of, you know, taking him to a fucking hospital, they tazed her too. They won a fuck-ton of money from the cops.
See, that’s the whole point I’m making: A ‘weapons use review’ would probably have short-circuited the whole ‘we need to go to court against you idiots’ business AND have gotten the jerks out of the force much sooner.
Presuming the process was allowed to run un-corrupted. Which is true in any regulatory body or action.
Ok, after spinning the linked track, found a new band to be into… and just bought tickets for the chicago show (along with another 8 or so people I sent the track to). Keep posting cool stuff!
A baton and a kick to the balls will not stop everyone. I remember seeing a video of a state trooper hit a guy with a taser and pepper spray and the dude kept coming. In full honesty, though, the officer also shot the guy and that didn’t even put him down, he was on steroids and God knows what else. I’m not saying a taser is a great idea for all situations, it’s a decent go between when a baton or pepper spray won’t work and deadly physical force is overreacting, but saying a baton and a stiff roshambo will suffice doesn’t pass muster. Also, cop points any kind of weapon at you and you decide you’re going to be hardass enough to keep giving him or her shit? Or you don’t go 100% limp like a wet noodle and get compliant real fast? You might be kind of asking for it.
The real problem though is that the police have a set protocol that they have to use, and unfortunately bitch slapping a rambunctious 10 year old kid isn’t part of the protocol anymore so they have to go with what they’re “authorized” to do. Hell, the world would be a LOT better if you could give a misbehaving kid a kick in the ass to correct some behavior without ACS all over you.
Just because many cops shoot dogs, it doesn’t mean guns should be banned, and just because cops seem to like zapping people is no reason to ban Tasers. The problem isn’t the tool, it’s the user of the tool. As long as they are above the law and not held accountable for their actions there will be members of that group will abuse their power, and people wanting to be abusive will be attracted to becoming members of that group.
More concisely-put than I managed. 🙂
I see no problem with tasers in law enforcement, so long as they are treated as a LESS-lethal weapon, and not as a one-stop cure-all for people who don’t put all of their faith in a LEO being the second coming of Christ.
I totally agree with this. The only thing I would add is that as a part of their training to use tasers, Police should have to get tazed themselves so they understand what it does.
We got da 403! *403!* Yeah you know me! *Yeah you know me*
Stupid alligator! 🙁
“Less than lethal” is a misnomer. These devices, whether rubber bullets, tasers, or ballistic beanbags, are properly termed “reduced lethality weapons.” And I think the folks saying that their use should trigger the same sort of review as firearms discharge are right. Anyone with police power needs to face oversight and review when they start using it.
The problem is, people are lazy. This applies regardless of field. Dave the Great strikes me as having been an excellent patrol officer, because he would bear in mind all his alternatives, and the sorts of circumstances where each best served his purpose. Using the Pareto Principle, I’d guess that describes about 20% of cops. The other 80% are likely to take attitudes towards the problems they’re paid to deal with that vary from Dagwood Bumstead at Dithers & Co. (low to moderate effort satisficing), all the way down to Wally, in Dilbert (deliberately seeking the lowest level of performance that will be tolerated).