TASER OPINIONS?

[zipperhead_cop]

I suspect we will have some answers after the what 5 or 6 inquiries/investigations wrap up.

Yeah, that after this guys reasoning skills jumped the rails he would have ignored directions in Polish as well.

 

[Shamrock]

Should they be issued and employed by the Military Police ? .

You tell us.  My initial response is why the hell not.

However, the questions arise: have there been enough significant incidents within normal policing duties that require another less-lethal alternative within the Branch?  Would Tasers have remedied these situations and reduced the likelihood of harm to MP's? 

And the big one: would it be financially viable?  Given the turn-over in MP's into little m roles where they aren't required to carry any weapons on a daily basis and transition to civilian policing, would this training be put to effective use within the CF, or would it just be of benefit to the individual soldiers.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

As far as MP's go, I think they should have them.  We don't have our weapons necessarily because of the frequency of use.  If that was the case, you wouldn't see C-8's replacing shotguns province wide.  It is the potential for use that matters.  At such time as a member gets tased instead of pepper sprayed, they will than that MP if they know the difference.
As for cost I could see them only being issued to supervisors, much the same as with us Muni guys. 

 

[larry Strong]

Okay, so when you are on gate duty in KAF, and a local is walking towards you and is ignoring your commands to stop, since you and your buds are "healthy, physically fit" soldiers you of course go out and meet the guy and simply use your hands to restrain him, right?  Of course not.  That isn't safe.  But more so, you have a set of rules that says that you don't have to put your life on the line like that in order to accommodate an individual that is being a problem.

Sorry I won’t buy that analogy. To try an equate a situation where in the one, the person goes thru numerous security checks, and who remains within an enclosed environment between 2 major international airports. With one where no one knows who the mook is, or where he has been or is coming from over in the “Wild West” of Afghanistan, where near everyone owns an AK and suicide bombers abound, is like trying to compare Apples and Oranges, There are no similarities.

It works the same for me.  Why should an officer have to get that close and put a smack down on a guy (which would have looked a whole lot worse on camera) and risk getting injured?  The taser is there for a reason; to incapacitate the bad guy in order to affect an arrest.  That is what happened. 

That’s it isn’t it. You see the Taser as a means of making your job easier, not for what it was intended to be, an intermediate means between  a soft arrest (for lack of a better word) or lethal force.
Why would I drill a 30% sour well, where inhaling less than a pin head of a invisible gas will drop me in my tracks….because it’s my job, it’s what I chose to do and what I get paid to do. Same with you. You chose your career path for reasons of your own. No one twisted your arm and forced you to become one. If I don’t like it I can move on. If LEO members have a concern about getting hurt, well maybe they should look for a different job. Some things come with the paycheck. It might have looked worse on camera, however Mr. Dziekanski could still be alive today,.

We show up at cluster f$cks and make them better.  That is our purpose. 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/10/23/bc-taser.html

.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/07/03/pepper-spray-parents.html

It’s got to be something to do with the air out there

We do our own inquiries because we understand the mechanics of how situations unfold.  As well, the findings are made public, so if anyone needs to go mucking about, they can do so. . 

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the RCMP conducting their own inquiries.  Compare it to the Flight Safety system in the CF.  It's run by a panel of aviators and others in related trades.  Even though they are investigating incidences that involve their own they are not afraid to call a spade a spade, because in the end it could very well save their own life one day.

Apples and Oranges again. A good majority of the public might not have the technical skills to tell you how a plane lifts of the ground, however I am pretty sure most of us poor, beerbellied sharecroppers have the mental acumen to figure out the mechanics of how situations unfold, Not much rocket science there

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

That’s it isn’t it. You see the Taser as a means of making your job easier, not for what it was intended to be, an intermediate means between  a soft arrest (for lack of a better word) or lethal force.
Why would I drill a 30% sour well, where inhaling less than a pin head of a invisible gas will drop me in my tracks….because it’s my job, it’s what I chose to do and what I get paid to do. Same with you. You chose your career path for reasons of your own. No one twisted your arm and forced you to become one. If I don’t like it I can move on. If LEO members have a concern about getting hurt, well maybe they should look for a different job. Some things come with the paycheck. .

Well Mr. Big Brave Man.........next time the gasses are swirling around show us what a hero cookie you are and don't don a mask like those around you.
You must be friggin' kidding me.

Apples and Oranges again. A good majority of the public might not have the technical skills to tell you how a plane lifts of the ground, however I am pretty sure most of us poor, beerbellied sharecroppers have the mental acumen to figure out the mechanics of how situations unfold, Not much rocket science there

Really......list me the stages of inmate uprisings and the appropriate measures to counteract, please,.....just in case I've missed something over the last 18 years.

Sorry I won’t buy that analogy. To try an equate a situation where in the one, the person goes thru numerous security checks, and who remains within an enclosed environment between 2 major international airports. With one where no one knows who the mook is, or where he has been or is coming from over in the “Wild West” of Afghanistan, where near everyone owns an AK and suicide bombers abound, is like trying to compare Apples and Oranges, There are no similarities.

I guess 9/11 was just a bad dream also......................please enlighten us how you know the difference between a "mook" and an average Canadian everyday person.
Careful how you word your response or a WDHP inquiry might kick in.....................

 

[larry Strong]

Well Mr. Big Brave Man.........next time the gasses are swirling around show us what a hero cookie you are and don't don a mask like those around you.
You must be friggin' kidding me.

You mask up when the situation warrants it, probably the same as when a Taser should be deployed.
What exactly was his crime? The biggest crime he committed, that I can figure out is he was damaging some airport property while losing his cool.
To follow this reasoning if someone comes into my house, and damages some of my propeerrty, I should be able to blast him. I don't think so. To the best of my knowledge the law states "minimum amount of force" and if I am not wrong that also applies to LEO's.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

You mask up when the situation warrants it, probably the same as when a Taser should be deployed.
What exactly was his crime? The biggest crime he committed, that I can figure out is he was damaging some airport property while losing his cool.
To follow this reasoning if someone comes into my house, and damages some of my propeerrty, I should be able to blast him. I don't think so. To the best of my knowledge the law states "minimum amount of force" and if I am not wrong that also applies to LEO's.

If you equate "blast him" to being tased than you are pathetically underqualified to even be in this conversation.....go back to the second post in this thread that was supposed to be about tasers and not the 'incident'.

You have every right to restrain someone in your house damaging property.......got that?

Now the kicker, I'll bet Mikes next paycheque that even if the officers had shown up with friggin' candles and singing Kumbya, that this guy had worked himself into "delirium' and was going to die anyway..........of course than the medical report would say stroke or aneurysm.

By the way, where is the thread where the LEO's on this site tell you how wells should be drilled?

 

[The_Falcon]

You mask up when the situation warrants it, probably the same as when a Taser should be deployed.
What exactly was his crime? The biggest crime he committed, that I can figure out is he was damaging some airport property while losing his cool.
To follow this reasoning if someone comes into my house, and damages some of my propeerrty, I should be able to blast him. I don't think so. To the best of my knowledge the law states "minimum amount of force" and if I am not wrong that also applies to LEO's.

And that was the minimum amount of force.  You can't have it both ways, you can't say the officers involved should have used the minimum amount of force required, and then in the same breath say they should have dogpiled him, in order to subdue him or resort to other pain compliance techniques which DON'T FRIGGEN WORK on individuals in the state of mind he was in.  Here watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIZQEc_o7Is and you can see how well pain compliance works on a determined individual.

 

[Shamrock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4X4aD9JQ48&feature=related

He got apologetic some fast. 

Somehow, I think that if Rob was required to deal the Tower of Mike alone, the outcome would have been a little less amicable.

 

[medaid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4X4aD9JQ48&feature=related
He got apologetic some fast. 

That's a classic video shown during Use of Force training. Seen it more then once.

And that was the minimum amount of force.  You can't have it both ways, you can't say the officers involved should have used the minimum amount of force required, and then in the same breath say they should have dogpiled him, in order to subdue him or resort to other pain compliance techniques which DON'T FRIGGEN WORK on individuals in the state of mind he was in.  Here watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIZQEc_o7Is and you can see how well pain compliance works on a determined individual.

This one was not so much as pain compliance, as it was the irritant being applied at the beginning. People develop "tolerances" to OC, and at times under alcohol or other form of narcotics, they will still be able to fight through it like this guy was. He did wash some of it out of his eyes though, or attempted to in the washroom.

Like I said, it took me, my partner, another 2 members to subdue a suspect who was smaller then the suspect in the first video. All of us about 200~ lbs with gear on, and we couldn't subdue him. He was fighting us even though he was still on the ground. OC was used, and compliance gained after that. Who ever thinks we can wrassel people to the ground and gain compliance 100% of the time is RTFOH.

You mask up when the situation warrants it, probably the same as when a Taser should be deployed.

because you, who've never been near a ECW or worked with LEOs know exactly when a ECW should be deployed?

What exactly was his crime?

I don't know... how about causing a disturbance... or if you'd like disturbing the peace. How about threatening with a weapon (stool), how about resisting arrest? How about obstruction? How about ignorance of the law is NOT an excuse?

To the best of my knowledge the law states "minimum amount of force" and if I am not wrong that also applies to LEO's.

Obviously, you did NOT watch the video. You have NOT read the thread thoroughly and you have obviously ignored ALL of the explanation by LEOs who are on this forum (one a Use of Force instructor) who have explained time and time again, that ECW (T.A.S.E.R) was acceptable as the MINIMUM use of force applied. I can't seem to find the Use of Force continuum or the Incident Management Intervention Module (IMIM) used by the RCMP anywhere on line, or maybe my GoogleFu just sucks right now. Regardless, if I had it, maybe I could better illustrate WHERE on the behaviour band Robert D. was on the day of the incident.

To follow this reasoning if someone comes into my house, and damages some of my property

You have the right to defend yourself. If you perceive the threat to be enough that your life was in danger, you have the right to use the minimum amount of force to defuse that situation. This means, if you were about to receive previous bodily harm or severe hurt and injury, you may use the appropriate level of force to end that possible harm or injury. In YOUR example, it is no where NEAR or CLOSE to what happened at the airport.

I should be able to blast him

If you mean "blast" as in, shooting and killing (because we all know that we're taught shoot to LIVE right?) then no, it wouldn't work. That would be Man Slaughter.

I don't think so.

Neither do I.

 

[Thompson_JM]

By the way, where is the thread where the LEO's on this site tell you how wells should be drilled?

Cant be that hard bruce... I mean if any old tom dick or harry can see that 4 strong young mounties should just dogpile onto a nutter in the airport then us Drooling Idiots should all know that all you really need are some shovels.... its just a well.... dig till you have a hole... then build a little stone work around the top, and a roof and a thing to lower the bucket..... i mean, I saw a movie on it once.... where this guy dug a hole.... and water came up... and thats what happened in the video, so obviously that the way it is....   :


and having been to af-stan, AND worked security in toronto, I felt safer at times in the ghan... I had a weapon and ROE's to protect me.... as a guard in downtown toronto, I had my wits and a kevlar vest.... but both jobs i had the same mentality.... I come home at the end of my shift, and if comes down to me or him (the baddie) screw him. cause Im comming home... I dont get paid enough to be a punching bag....

Seriously Larry, You're so far out of your Arcs on this one that you're hitting range control....

but dont stop on my account.... Since you seem so fond of digging holes I say keep going... lets see how deep you can go...

 

[The_Falcon]

This one was not so much as pain compliance, as it was the irritant being applied at the beginning. People develop "tolerances" to OC, and at times under alcohol or other form of narcotics, they will still be able to fight through it like this guy was. He did wash some of it out of his eyes though, or attempted to in the washroom.

Not to nitpick to much  , yes OC acts as an irritant, however it is deployed as a pain compliance measure, because it "supposed" to hurt like hell and take the fight out of you (personal experience).  And your right about the tolerances, that why I posted the link to that video, to attempt to show Larry that people in altered mental states (alcohol, drugs, etc.), can either a)completely block out the effects of OC, b) fight through it despite the pain, or both. Was he trying to wash some of it off? Well he was trying, more likely just trying to cool his face off, but even still, the spray WAS NOT EFFECTIVE in incapacitating him, and they (NOPD) still dogpiled the guy (with way more than 4 officers) and he was still RESISTING.  The video also highlights the negatives of using OC and thats cross-contamination.

Like I said, it took me, my partner, another 2 members to subdue a suspect who was smaller then the suspect in the first video. All of us about 200~ lbs with gear on, and we couldn't subdue him. He was fighting us even though he was still on the ground. OC was used, and compliance gained after that. Who ever thinks we can wrassel people to the ground and gain compliance 100% of the time is RTFOH.

In your case, OC was effective, however like you just said you had to wrestle first, thereby increasing the risk of potential injuries to all parties, and increasing the chances for cross-contamination (which is no fun, and not something I would like to repeat unless its a training environment).

 

[Koenigsegg]

There is a picture of a Use Of Force diagram in the Gallery...if that is similar enough to the IMIM.  I think it is in the General album.  I would provide the link, but things are messed up at my end.

 

[medaid]

Not to nitpick to much 

Nitpicker . You can still fight after OC's been applied. Hell I had to under training. Grab my radio and call it in, it sucked. But you're right though, it's a form of "pain" compliance. In my case, if we had waited till a ECW arrived, I would not have ripped my SBA and I would not have gotten my pants dirty and boots scuffed... I worked really hard on my damn boots!!  :rage:

 

[portcullisguy]

AFTER doing research online with emed professionals the taser isnt listed as a cause of death its listed as a FACTOR  of death. "the fall didnt kill the person  the way his skull colapsed on his brain was a factor in his death ,.the way his heart wascrushed by the ribcagethat was a factor in his death ETC . you can bury the basic facts but the facts are that this is not a safe alternative to a real bullet.

You bring up a good point.  In a basic law class they bring up the issue of cause and effect with this age-old question:  "If a man who jumps off a building passes a window at the exact moment another man fires a gun out of the window, killing the falling man, is he guilty for causing his death?"

Is the gunshot wound merely a factor in the inevitable death of the falling man?  Or is it the direct cause?  Afterall, it's possible the person falling could have survived (if the building wasn't that tall, or a bunch of trees break the fall, etc).

 

[Old Ranger]

Tasers..Yes!  they are a direct influence on the individual that needs to learn compliance.

Spray is indirect and affects innocents with respiratory problems.

Zap someone and if they need to go in my Ambulance, I'm back in service like normal.
Spray someone, and if they need to go in my Ambulance, I'm out of Service for hours to get all that crap out, so it doesn't harm my next patient.

How about remote control tasers attached to repeat offenders.... >

 

[JesseWZ]

How about remote control tasers attached to repeat offenders.... >

Now THAT is an idea I could live with.  ;D

 

[medaid]

How about remote control tasers attached to repeat offenders.... >

Like a pacemaker? Rather a peacemaker? "Sir, stop immediately or I will..." (activates the remote) "AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH"

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Heheheheh.  Soon, my young apprentice.  All in good time.  Once we control the Senate we will be unstoppable! 

 

[Shamrock]

Amputation is cheaper and more effective.  Remove the means, remove the temptation.