5'2", 110lbs. Can you handle him?

[Zoom-boing]

Because I was scared shitless of getting in trouble. It had nothing to do with what my mommy and daddy told me to do in a situation involving the police.

Thus your parents raised you right, you knew they put people who did something wrong in jail.

An innocent person doesn't run from them unless they are wrongly informed as to what the job of the police is.

Have you yet caught that this kid had a learning disability?

But that's all bullshit anyway. Granted he ran, granted he may have been guilty of something, granted he was a kid that weighed 110 pounds. And two cops couldn't subdue him without the aid of a weapon.

This is so easy. Even if the cops don't hurt him, if two cops can't take a 110lb kid, they should get a job at the hair salon.

I can't rep you again, but I would if I could.

 

[jgbkab]

I repeat. How do you "wrap up arms" on someone who's running away from you, Einstein?

Uh, they caught up to him to taser him, don't you think they could have caught him to grab him, wrap him, and put on ground and restrain and cuff him?

Uh, I didn't get the impression that they "caught up with him" at all. The article said nothing about chasing him, unless I completely missed it. And tasering is still easier and safer than engaging in hand-to-hand contact with him. Have you even stopped to ask yourself why the police department teaches them to do it that way if just tackling him would be better? Or were you just going to redesign the Training Academy's program according to your personal understanding of how it "should" be done, no doubt gleaned from countless hours of watching "Law and Order"?

Ever watch an episode of cops? I've seen plenty cops chase down "suspects" And they rarely use tasers. It's usually after the "suspect" has been apprehended, subdued and he's resisting. Tasers are rarely used as the first weapon. It's usually the gun. One cop subdues the suspect and the other has a Glock .40 aimed at the suspects head.

 

[random3434]

i think the presumption of innocence from the cops' POV goes away when he flees the car and hides in an abandoned house.

call me crazy

And I think a scared 16 yo boy's first instinct might be to run, call me crazy.

you might be right, but once the kid runs, it's a different scenario as far as the cops are concerned. do you honestly believe the cops wanted to kill him?

Have I said that anywhere in this thread? No I haven't. What Article, Sweet Willy and Zoom-boing and myself are saying that it could have been handled differently, because they did have the opportunity to restrain him.

 

[KittenKoder]

Two trained cops would only need to use a reasonable amount of 'force' to get a 5'2", 110 lb. kid down. I'm 5'2", as is my son. He's strong but I can bring him down and keep him there, if needed. And I've got zero training. Bullshit on the taser in this situation. They could have cuffed the kid without using it.

You would have also hurt him anyway, and there is a higher chance of injury no matter how you spin it.

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Again, there is a MUCH higher chance of serious injury to both when using any other form of subduction.

You understand there is a 100% chance this kid is DEAD? We aren't talking injury, let's talk dead.

But tasers have a much lower chance of killing than tackling someone ... seriously, do you ever think without your head up your ass? He died from a serious injury caused by electricity ... since you are so big on word play. You do realize more people die of a simple bump on the head than from electricity? Of course not, you don't care, you just want to hang the people who risk their lives every day to keep you safe until you need them.

Two cops, one 110 lb. kid. No tackling necessary. I've done it - one person, one 110 lb. kid. Bullshit KK.

 

[KittenKoder]

You understand there is a 100% chance this kid is DEAD? We aren't talking injury, let's talk dead.

But tasers have a much lower chance of killing than tackling someone ... seriously, do you ever think without your head up your ass? He died from a serious injury caused by electricity ... since you are so big on word play. You do realize more people die of a simple bump on the head than from electricity? Of course not, you don't care, you just want to hang the people who risk their lives every day to keep you safe until you need them.

Two cops, one 110 lb. kid. No tackling necessary. I've done it - one person, one 110 lb. kid. Bullshit KK.

There would still be risk and chance of injury, no matter how they did it ... period.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Getting shocked though only has a chance of serious injury based on the amount of amperage. You can't apply logic to one without the other. Both have risks, but the risks of tasers is lower, period, and deaths caused by them are far less than any other form of subductin, period. You can't keep whining about the cops doing their jobs, they keep changing their techniques to support such idiotics only to be assaulted again for it. People wanted them to use tasers instead of tackling, so they did, spent millions on it to. Now you want them to go back to tackling? Seriously, you are just wanting to blame them .... until you need them, then you'll whine that they don't do enough.

Kitten, you can ditch the whole "don't beat up on cops" routine. They are humans. They are not infallable. Cops are criminals too. They traffic drugs, rape and murder. Isn't there a famous cop on trial right now for murdering his wife? i suppose I just hate cops if i demand justice for that?

do you think the cops deliberately killed this kid?

No.

 

[del]

And I think a scared 16 yo boy's first instinct might be to run, call me crazy.

you might be right, but once the kid runs, it's a different scenario as far as the cops are concerned. do you honestly believe the cops wanted to kill him?

Have I said that anywhere in this thread? No I haven't. What Article, Sweet Willy and Zoom-boing and myself are saying that it could have been handled differently, because they did have the opportunity to restrain him.

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

 

[Sweet Willy]

SW: A small number compared to the total still ... no matter how you spin it, you lost.

Small number of what total? What are you talking about?

And if you haven't noticed yet, this is turning into a dog pile. You are making zero sense.

 

[Sweet Willy]

you might be right, but once the kid runs, it's a different scenario as far as the cops are concerned. do you honestly believe the cops wanted to kill him?

Have I said that anywhere in this thread? No I haven't. What Article, Sweet Willy and Zoom-boing and myself are saying that it could have been handled differently, because they did have the opportunity to restrain him.

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

 

[Zoom-boing]

You would have also hurt him anyway, and there is a higher chance of injury no matter how you spin it.

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

The taser was not necessary in this instance. TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. As I've posted several times so far, I've done it myself with my son.

A broken arm vs. being shocked with a device that has killed. Broken arm (or whatever) and physically taking him down should have been their first choice. They should have been capable of this.

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

You would have also hurt him anyway, and there is a higher chance of injury no matter how you spin it.

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

It's shitheads like Sweet Willy who are the reasons urban neighborhoods are in a shambles. They want to tie cops hands behind their backs

 

[KittenKoder]

SW: A small number compared to the total still ... no matter how you spin it, you lost.

Small number of what total? What are you talking about?

And if you haven't noticed yet, this is turning into a dog pile. You are making zero sense.

Um ... no ... not really. You are just avoiding reality. The reality is, your town does not come close to the total number of people on the planet, thus a few hundred stories might prove a small percentage of the total incidents. One death caused because of an injury in which murder was not the intended result does not make an actual threat.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Have I said that anywhere in this thread? No I haven't. What Article, Sweet Willy and Zoom-boing and myself are saying that it could have been handled differently, because they did have the opportunity to restrain him.

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

If the kid had a weapon, it changes things. The kid had no criminal record, was learning disabled and a weapon was not mentioned in the article.

 

[Article 15]

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

It's shitheads like Sweet Willy who are the reasons urban neighborhoods are in a shambles. They want to tie cops hands behind their backs

WTF are you talking about?

I haven't seen him say anything about limiting the cops power or ability to apprehend a suspect ... only questioning of whether or not the force they used was necessary given the situation.

Crawl back into your hole, troll.

 

[Sweet Willy]

So what? The taser was not necessary in this instance. If two cops couldn't bring this kid down they need more training.

Really, what part of "hurt him anyway" does that not account for? Again, no matter what, taking him down would have caused injury, they used what was considered the safest means of subduction. Either way, something can go wrong, no matter how you do it.

It's shitheads like Sweet Willy who are the reasons urban neighborhoods are in a shambles. They want to tie cops hands behind their backs

That made me LOL and I NEVER LOL !

Actually, we arguing for cops to use their hands!

Have you checked out where cops are suing PDs and taser manufacturers? Sounds like cops are as much a part of this as anyone. They want them gone too.

 

[del]

Have I said that anywhere in this thread? No I haven't. What Article, Sweet Willy and Zoom-boing and myself are saying that it could have been handled differently, because they did have the opportunity to restrain him.

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

 

[Sweet Willy]

SW: A small number compared to the total still ... no matter how you spin it, you lost.

Small number of what total? What are you talking about?

And if you haven't noticed yet, this is turning into a dog pile. You are making zero sense.

Um ... no ... not really. You are just avoiding reality. The reality is, your town does not come close to the total number of people on the planet, thus a few hundred stories might prove a small percentage of the total incidents. One death caused because of an injury in which murder was not the intended result does not make an actual threat.

COPS are suing kitten. For being tased for one second.

But again, you and the couple others here are just weiners. Any cop worthy of the badge can handle a 110lb kid without a taser, without cracking his head, without a stick. If he isn't armed, two cops should be able to handle him, no problem. If they can't, they can't even get a nurses job at the mental hospital.

 

[del]

Small number of what total? What are you talking about?

And if you haven't noticed yet, this is turning into a dog pile. You are making zero sense.

Um ... no ... not really. You are just avoiding reality. The reality is, your town does not come close to the total number of people on the planet, thus a few hundred stories might prove a small percentage of the total incidents. One death caused because of an injury in which murder was not the intended result does not make an actual threat.

COPS are suing kitten. For being tased for one second.

But again, you and the couple others here are just weiners. Any cop worthy of the badge can handle a 110lb kid without a taser, without cracking his head, without a stick. If he isn't armed, two cops should be able to handle him, no problem. If they can't, they can't even get a nurses job at the mental hospital.

how long have you been a cop?

 

[Zoom-boing]

i didn't mean to imply that you said that; i only asked the question.

i saw nothing in the link that said anything specific enough about the circumstances to question the cops' decision to use a taser on the kid, and so i think it's a little early to second guess them for how they handled it.

I will concede that there is a possibility that there is something else to this. Maybe he had a knife. But from what we have, it was a 110lb kid that ran. That's it. I would think a weapon or other justification would have been made clear by the cops right away.

"Police said the teen was resisting arrest after bolting from his cousin's car during a traffic stop, and the use of the Taser was justified."

resisting arrest is justification for using non-lethal force, IMO.
a taser is non-lethal force.

TWO COPS, ONE 110 LB. KID. They could have grabbed him and cuffed him without the use of a taser.