Close

Page 1 of 3 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 64
  1. #1
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    7454
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  2. #2
    Moderator Mtnjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    SAN DIEGO
    Posts
    2,481
    Rep Power
    7122

    Default

    Ya', they should have used a 12

    gage, since he was obviously a terrorist!!
    Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite.
    --Lazarus Long

  3. #3
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    6802

    Default none

    Hey Citizen!!! drop that

    weapon or we'll shoot!!! Can you blame 'em - no tanks backing them up this time.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  4. #4
    Man of La Pancha
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Pancho Villa
    Posts
    2,077
    Rep Power
    6731

    Default

    Why is that article

    bullsh*t?

  5. #5
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    6802

    Default none

    it's not the article

    that's being disparaged it's the fact that two police officers felt a need to use a stun gun on a 6 year old. Put

    yourself in the shoes of those policemen and tell us if you would have accomplished things the same way??
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  6. #6
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    7305

    Default

    On the face of it, it's hard

    to imagine doing that to a kid. You'd think that 4 adults could have cornered or outsmarted him to keep him from

    hurting himself. Hurting himself is the real issue here. I've thought about it several times today and just don't

    know. Can you imagine a situation in a confined space where it was the only option to keep him from further harming

    himself?

    I wasn't there and don't understand the situation. My inclination is to think using a taser on a kid

    was pretty extreme and uncalled for. But I don't know.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    7454

    Default

    It's partly lack of training.

    Anyone working with a lot of kids like in a school needs training on crisis management. For that matter cops should

    be trained in dealing with kids too. I've worked with the most disturbed and suicidal kids there are for many years

    and I can guarantee you there was no need to do that. There is no way a six year old should be able to harm

    himself that bad with glass while six adults are standing around, or even one adult. Not only did he harm himself,

    he got shot with a stun gun or whatever. As a child advocate I found that a bit disgusting.

    But yeah, they

    should have called in a swat team.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  8. #8
    Full Member HK45Mark23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SouthWestern Indiana
    Posts
    134
    Rep Power
    5979

    Post

    50,000

    volts is a lot for a 6 year old kid. Good thing it was not one of those 250,000 volt machines. The kid would have

    died for sure. The kid was hostile and armed I can’t say if their actions were excessive or not but I think they

    are lucky that 50,000 volts did not kill the kid. He might be a large 6 years old and have a psychological problem

    that increases his adrenalin. Under the condition that the kid was producing high levels of adrenalin he could be

    dangerous and hard to handle. We have a state mental institution in my city. It is for the criminally mental ill.

    It is a maximum security mental health facility. Many children are there and they are dangerous.



    HK45Mark23

  9. #9
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    7454

    Default

    I also worked on a kids unit

    in a mental hospital for three years, and in another residential facility. You're trained in crisis diffusion,

    takedowns, holds, safety, seclusion and restraint pretty heavily and regularly. This obviously highlights the need

    for training of people working with large numbers of kids. Most incidents dont need to get that point at all. Six

    years old is very young in mental illness and dangerousness terms. They really don't become impossible to control

    that young in terms of a single crisis with a lot of adults around. I mean he had a piece of broken glass in his

    tiny hand for chrissakes, not an AK47.

    50,000 volts does sound like a lot. Nine volts sounds like a lot.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  10. #10
    Full Member culturalblonde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    183
    Rep Power
    6341

    Angry

    Yeah, someone has a lot of

    explaining to do.

    The police

    report:
    http://www.miami.com/multimedia/miami/news/archive/taserreport.pdf

    From the Miami

    Herald:
    http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/10161183.htm?1c

    http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/

  11. #11
    Full Member HK45Mark23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SouthWestern Indiana
    Posts
    134
    Rep Power
    5979

    Post

    Yes DST,



    I agree and I feel I could have

    restrained this kid. My cousin and her husband work in children’s psychiatric wards and it is true that they know

    how to handle such situations. I feel the school principal should have been able to have handled this child. She if

    any one should have had the training. This also brings up my “opinion” about how parents are not being allowed to

    punish their children. Then the parents are punished if the child commits a crime. This kid may just need a good

    spanking or series of them over a period of time. Sorry if this offends any one. I was spanked and am a better

    person for it. I probably needed more but my parents loved me and truly meant it when they said “This is going to

    hurt me more than it will you.” I love them for disciplining me.


    50,000

    volts is a lot for a kid and the higher the # the stronger. The difference between volts, amps and watts is a theory

    I can discuss.
    Standard Stun Gun Conventional stun guns and tasers have a

    fairly simple design. They are about the size of a flashlight, and they work on ordinary 9-volt batteries.

    The batteries supply electricity to a circuit consisting of various electrical components. The circuitry

    includes multiple

    transformers, components that boost the

    voltage in the circuit, typically to between 20,000 and 150,000 volts, or as many as 625,000 volts and reduce the

    amperage. It also includes an oscillator, a component that fluctuates current to produce a specific pulse

    pattern of electricity. This current charges a

    capacitor. The capacitor builds up a charge,

    and releases it to the electrodes, the "business end" of the circuit. The electrodes are simply two plates of

    conducting metal positioned in the circuit with a gap between them. Since the electrodes are positioned along the

    circuit, they have a high voltage difference between them. If you fill this gap with a conductor (say, the

    attacker's body), the electrical pulses will try to move from one electrode the other, dumping electricity into the

    attacker's nervous system. Cattle Prods Cattle prods are similar to stun guns in design -- they apply an electrical

    current across two electrodes -- but they serve a completely different function. A stun gun uses an electrical

    charge to incapacitate someone, while a cattle prod applies a charge to get a person or animal moving. A cattle prod

    only causes pain; it does not significantly affect the muscles and nervous system of the body. These two devices

    differ mainly in voltage. The voltage in a stun gun is high enough to dump electricity into the entire

    body. The lower voltage in a cattle prod only shocks someone at the point of contact.





    HK45Mark23
    Last edited by HK45Mark23; 11-13-2004 at 12:54 AM.

  12. #12
    Full Member HK45Mark23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SouthWestern Indiana
    Posts
    134
    Rep Power
    5979

    Default

    I did a search on Google and

    found this.
    How Stun Guns Work
    A stun gun is an

    electrical self-defense device that uses high voltage to stop an attacker. Touching a person with the prongs on the

    stun gun quickly immobilizes the attacker. However, because the amperage is very low, no serious or permanent injury

    is inflicted.
    Stun guns are designed to key into the nervous system. They dump their energy into the muscles at a

    different frequency than the pulse waves emanating from the brain. The pulse waves coming from the brain and those

    from the stun gun collide at the nerve synapse' which is a type of complex processing switch adjacent to each

    muscle group. The resulting energy collision makes it difficult for an attacker to move and function. This causes

    disorientation and loss of balance and leaves the attacker in a passive and confused condition for several minutes.

    Still, stun guns have no significant effect on the heart and other organs.
    As a general rule, a one-half second

    contact from a stun gun will repel and startle the attacker, giving some pain and muscle contraction. One to two

    seconds will cause muscle spasms and a dazed mental state. Over three seconds will cause loss of balance and muscle

    control, mental confusion and disorientation.
    However, don't think about how many seconds you should hold the stun

    gun to your attacker. Think about it this way. Throw out what the books say and the online information you have read

    about stun guns. You should hold your stun gun to the assailant until they drop and you can get away and call the

    police, whether that may be one second or six seconds.
    What is the difference between the 80,000 volt model and the

    625,000 you might ask? Look at it this way, both stun guns will render your assailant helpless, but you might have

    to hold the 80kv Talon mini a second or two longer than the 625kv Stunmaster. Consider this. A stun gun is effective

    on most all parts of the body. But give yourself the best chance to get the best of your attacker. Hold the stun gun

    on a body part that has a lot of surface area, such as the chest, abdomen, groin, kidneys, back, etc. An area such

    as the arm or leg will work fine, but these body parts do not allow you the same amount of surface area that you

    will need to contact for a few seconds.
    What does a stun gun feel like? If you have ever hit your funny bone,

    multiply that by ten thousand and extend it throughout your entire body. The inablility to function and feeling of

    helplessness combined with the sensation of millions of tiny needles going through your body provides certain

    inherent physical, mental and emotional trauma.
    The electrical shock that emits from the stunning device will not

    pass from the person being stunned to the person doing the stunning. The effect is localized only in the affected

    area and does not pass through the body. Even if you or the attacker are wet or standing in water, you will not be

    shocked.

    HK45Mark23


  13. #13
    Full Member DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Hollow Inside Myself
    Posts
    166
    Rep Power
    6095

    Default

    50,000 Volts will not

    kill... it isnt the volts that kills... it is the current... I dont believe it puts out enough current to kill...

    even a 6 year old

    adams

  14. #14
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    7305

    Default

    No, in a vast majority of cases

    it will not kill. The amperage is miniscule and unless there is some other underlying issue it shouldn't be fatal.

    You can get as many volts through you from a bad static shock although the duration is much shorter and the

    frequency is not intended to disrupt nerve activity like a stun gun does. There have been fatalities associated with

    stun guns but the victim had other problems also.

    I think the Doc's point is that the adults present should

    have been able to handle it without the stun gun. That's where all the uncertainty comes in. It seems like there

    were a lot of failures leading up to the police taking action. It isn't a discipline issue, when a child gets to

    the point of self inflicting harm, this is more than a temper tantrum. I am not at all oppossed to spanking a child

    when appropriate but this case sounds like something different altogether.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  15. #15
    Full Member HK45Mark23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SouthWestern Indiana
    Posts
    134
    Rep Power
    5979

    Default



    Yeah, you are right Adams, and I totally agree Belgareth. It is possibly a result of

    improper parenting or abuse.


  16. #16
    Full Member DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Hollow Inside Myself
    Posts
    166
    Rep Power
    6095

    Default

    I understand the topic of

    the thread was different, and I agree with you on them points... just I threw in a little bit of knowledge I had



    Adams

  17. #17
    Phero Dude DCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    668
    Rep Power
    6535

    Default

    I don't see anyone griping about

    police shooting unarmed "suspects" in the back.
    Why should they change their tactics now?


    DCW

  18. #18
    Full Member DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Hollow Inside Myself
    Posts
    166
    Rep Power
    6095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DCW
    I don't see

    anyone griping about police shooting unarmed "suspects" in the back.
    Why should they change their tactics now?




    DCW
    Completely different topic... but you put yourself in harms way why dont you... be a solution,

    instead of bitching about the problem???

    Adams

  19. #19
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    7305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982
    Completely

    different topic... but you put yourself in harms way why dont you... be a solution, instead of bitching about the

    problem???

    Adams
    Exactly! When you enter an arena you have to accept the risks associated with it.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  20. #20
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    6802

    Default I don't care if my post(s) get deleted but how's

    about informing me in some way????

    at any rate, here's this too:



    Police

    Tasered truant girl, 12

    Miami Herald | Nov 13 2004


    A Miami-Dade police officer used a Taser to

    stop an unarmed, 12-year-old girl who was running away from him after she was caught skipping school, police

    acknowledged Friday night.

    The incident happened Nov. 5, just over two weeks after other Miami-Dade officers

    used a stun gun to restrain a first-grader. In that case, police said the 6-year-old boy was holding a shard of

    glass and threatening to cut himself. Police Director Bobby Parker defended the decision to shock the boy because he

    could have seriously hurt himself.

    But Parker said Friday that he could not defend the decision to shock the

    fleeing 12-year-old, who was apparently drunk.

    ''Under the circumstances, we thought that he should not

    have used the Taser,'' Parker said referring to the officer. ``It's likely that discipline will be

    forthcoming.''

    According to the incident report:

    Officer William Nelson responded to an anonymous

    complaint that some kids were swimming in a West Kendall pool, drinking alcohol and smoking cigars about 11

    a.m.

    Nelson said he noticed the girl was intoxicated and told her to get dressed so he could take her back to

    school.

    ''While walking [the girl] to the police car, [she] took off running through the parking lot,''

    Nelson wrote in his report.

    Nelson, 38, a 15-year veteran, said he chased her and yelled several times for

    her to stop. Nelson said he pulled out the Taser and fired when the girl began to run into traffic.

    The

    electric probes hit the girl in the neck and lower back, immobilizing her with 50,000 volts.

    Nelson said he

    fired ''for my safety along with [the girl's] safety.'' He could not be reached for comment.

    Paramedics

    treated the girl, who went home with her mother.

    Parker said department policy permits officers to use the

    Taser to apprehend someone, but he said he expected his officers to use better judgment -- especially when police

    had no plans to arrest someone playing hooky.

    ''If you use it to apprehend an adult, it would be an arrest

    kind of situation,'' said Parker, adding that the timing of the latest incident couldn't be any worse.

    His

    department is already under fire for using a Taser to subdue the 6-year-old last month. That zapping has made

    national headlines and prompted calls from child advocates that Miami-Dade review its Taser use.

    Parker said

    Friday night that his department will review its Taser policy. ''That doesn't mean that we're going to change

    it,'' he said.

    County Commissioner Joe Martinez, a former Miami-Dade officer, said the policy needs to be

    tightened.

    ''When you have a 6-year-old who is on medication and very disturbed, maybe some of that crisis

    intervention training would be very handy,'' he said, referring to a program that teaches officers how to deal

    with the mentally ill. ``Now, when I learn that a 12-year-old girl was running away, truant, and was also Tasered, I

    think it's time we instruct the county manager to look at that policy.''

    Asked if his officers had shocked

    any other kids, Parker said: ``I asked the same question, are there more of these out there that I'm not aware of?

    To my knowledge this is the only one.''
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  21. #21
    Phero Dude DCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    668
    Rep Power
    6535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982
    Completely

    different topic... but you put yourself in harms way why dont you... be a solution, instead of bitching about the

    problem???

    Adams

    Different topic??

    I thought we were talking about excessive

    force and proper training?
    And who's bicthing...not here.


    DCW

  22. #22
    Phero Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    6802

    Default none

    "I don't see anyone

    griping about police shooting unarmed "suspects" in the back.
    Why should they change their tactics

    now?


    DCW"

    I don't see how this could possibly be "off-topic". Police brutality includes not only

    the use of stun guns, real guns, night-sticks, broomstick handles, fists, overly tightened handcuffs, etc etc.. I

    don't really care too much when it comes to common everyday criminals but when we're talking kids and legitimate

    political protestors I care a whole bunch.
    There is a cure for electile dysfuntion!!!!

  23. #23
    Phero Dude DCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    668
    Rep Power
    6535

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by koolking1
    "I don't see anyone

    griping about police shooting unarmed "suspects" in the back.
    Why should they change their tactics

    now?


    DCW"

    I don't see how this could possibly be "off-topic". Police brutality includes not only

    the use of stun guns, real guns, night-sticks, broomstick handles, fists, overly tightened handcuffs, etc etc.. I

    don't really care too much when it comes to common everyday criminals but when we're talking kids and legitimate

    political protestors I care a whole bunch.

    Thank you, Thank you, someone finally got

    it.


    DCW

  24. #24
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    7454

    Default

    Police also need training in

    dealing with kids.

    Usually they're coming from a place of not accepting risk of physical harm or engaging in

    physical intervention except when the result of incapacitation of a "subject" will be virtually guaranteed.



    If they're going to "get physical", somebody is getting incapacitated. Further, if they're going to shoot, it

    will be to kill.

    There used to be a lot more emphasis on "halfway" measures like judo holds and the like. For

    that matter, the days of "aiming for a leg "are long gone -- a "quaint" relic of the past (like the Geneva

    Convention, according to Ashcroft's replacement ).

    But with small kids, the issue is entirely different, in

    that the risk of critical bodily harm to an officer is much lower, unless the kid has a gun or knife; and the

    risk to the subject is much higher. A policy of least harmful intervention should be in place.

    There are

    various holds and restraint/seclusion proceedures that are time tested and court-tested -- that will stand scrutiny;

    and have proved safe.

    There is no excuse for police officers to not have this training. It also comes in handy

    with other less dangerous "subjects". Police cannot have a situation were they are completely insulated from mixing

    it up with anyone in such cases. That risk also comes with the territory.

    Aside from that, 99 times out of 100,

    a skilled crisis worker can diffuse a situation without anything "physical" happening.

    In this case, chances

    are someone could have just said "Billy, I'm going to help you stay safe with that glass", grabbed the child's

    wrist, and freed the glass. At most the person would have gotten punched by a six year old. Big f-ing deal! There

    are lots of other, more involved techniques that could have been tried, of course, and would have worked much

    better, given the presence of multiple adults.

    Some thick gloves over rubber would have helped, or even some

    towels over rubber. Glass is a pretty common dangerous object to encounter, since it is the most readily available

    dangerous thing. The factor here is that people are afraid of getting AIDS or Hepatitis through contact with bodily

    fluids.

    But there are priorities to consider, once you minimize risks to the extent possible.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  25. #25
    Man of La Pancha
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Pancho Villa
    Posts
    2,077
    Rep Power
    6731

    Default

    I still don't get why

    everyone's making such a fuss. The 6-year old cut himself three times. The cop stopped himself from hurting

    himself anymore, and the kid is not permanently harmed. In the other case, had a drunken 12-year old run out into

    traffic and gotten killed while being chased by the police, you can be sure that officer would've been in three

    times the trouble he's in now. After 15 years on the force, he saved himself a world of trouble.

    When you're

    in the heat of the moment with a worked-up kid, you have the option of taking him down with your hands or using the

    taser. Kids are small and agile, and with his level of arousal he could've wiggled his way enough to hurt himself

    further. He could've cut one of the people there. The taser was a sure thing.


    I knew a guy who specialized

    in pressure points and took down this psych patient who was huge and because of his illness could summon almost

    inhuman strength. In fact, the two or three guys supposed to be handling him told the guy to let the patient go

    because they could handle it, and when he did the patient flipped out again and the guy had to repeat his

    technique.

    As nice as it would be to teach every police officer those or similar techniques, the taser was just

    as effective in those situations.

    There is a major difference between killing someone and temporarily

    incapacitating them, by the way...in these situations, I believe the police made the correct moves to protect

    everyone involved. You can't expect the police, with the low budget it probably has in the first place, to be

    trained in every form of disabling people known to man. As my friend once said, "I don't like how martial arts

    shows you 1,500 ways to do things. When you're actually in a fight-or-flight situation, you forget it all.

    You're not going to do a back flip into a flying spin kick. In those situations, you should master one move and be

    able to use it effectively. After all, fights aren't like in the movies. Fights last 2 seconds. You have time

    for one move to take the other guy down. Know what your move is and execute it perfectly." I think that's what

    the police did.



    Nobody's hurt, so why is everyone complaining?

  26. #26
    Full Member DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Hollow Inside Myself
    Posts
    166
    Rep Power
    6095

    Default

    Great post Pancho.



    DCW... How can you say this is in the same ball field???

    A suspect gets shot (And you are NEVER in these

    types of situations, so you cant judge him)... the police officer could have had reason to believe his life was in

    danger... YOU DONT KNOW... so therefore you cannot judge this... he wears a uniform that draws in danger, and if it

    wasnt him to pull the trigger, who knows... he could be the one dead... we give police a certain amount of power for

    a reason... so protect and serve the people who dont want to.

    This situation was defused, no one was hurt beyond

    what was already done, were are these even close together???

    Adams

  27. #27
    Phero Pro SweetBrenda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    935
    Rep Power
    6309

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Pancho1188
    I still

    don't get why everyone's making such a fuss. The 6-year old cut himself three times. The cop stopped himself from

    hurting himself anymore, and the kid is not permanently harmed. In the other case, had a drunken 12-year old run out

    into traffic and gotten killed while being chased by the police, you can be sure that officer would've been in

    three times the trouble he's in now. After 15 years on the force, he saved himself a world of trouble.

    When

    you're in the heat of the moment with a worked-up kid, you have the option of taking him down with your hands or

    using the taser. Kids are small and agile, and with his level of arousal he could've wiggled his way enough to hurt

    himself further. He could've cut one of the people there. The taser was a sure thing.


    I knew a guy who

    specialized in pressure points and took down this psych patient who was huge and because of his illness could summon

    almost inhuman strength. In fact, the two or three guys supposed to be handling him told the guy to let the patient

    go because they could handle it, and when he did the patient flipped out again and the guy had to repeat his

    technique.

    As nice as it would be to teach every police officer those or similar techniques, the taser was just

    as effective in those situations.

    There is a major difference between killing someone and temporarily

    incapacitating them, by the way...in these situations, I believe the police made the correct moves to protect

    everyone involved. You can't expect the police, with the low budget it probably has in the first place, to be

    trained in every form of disabling people known to man. As my friend once said, "I don't like how martial arts

    shows you 1,500 ways to do things. When you're actually in a fight-or-flight situation, you forget it all. You're

    not going to do a back flip into a flying spin kick. In those situations, you should master one move and be able to

    use it effectively. After all, fights aren't like in the movies. Fights last 2 seconds. You have time for one move

    to take the other guy down. Know what your move is and execute it perfectly." I think that's what the police did.





    Nobody's hurt, so why is everyone complaining?
    Well said Pancho.
    A great pleasure in life is doing what people say you can not do."

  28. #28
    Sadhu bjf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,781
    Rep Power
    6971

    Default

    Yea, I would have just shot the

    little f*ckers!

  29. #29
    Phero Dude DCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Houston TX
    Posts
    668
    Rep Power
    6535

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982
    Great post

    Pancho.

    DCW... How can you say this is in the same ball field???

    A suspect gets shot (And you are

    NEVER in these types of situations, so you cant judge him)... the police officer could have had reason to believe

    his life was in danger... YOU DONT KNOW... so therefore you cannot judge this... he wears a uniform that draws in

    danger, and if it wasnt him to pull the trigger, who knows... he could be the one dead... we give police a certain

    amount of power for a reason... so protect and serve the people who dont want to.

    This situation was

    defused, no one was hurt beyond what was already done, were are these even close together???



    Adams

    Did you read my post? I know the word "suspesct" carry a certain ahh....shall we say

    image to some of you in here.

    To be a "suspect" doesn't necessarly mean your guilty of any crime (imagine

    that).

    The so called "suspect" was a 17 year old kid that was "running away" I say it again "running awaaaay"

    from the brave policeman
    when he was shot in the back, and the reason he was running away? Well it turned out

    that this "suspect" was working illegally
    cleaning offices and was walking home and just happen to be at the

    wrong place at the wrong time.

    I'm sure he probably he deserved it taking away minimum wage cleaning jobs

    away from red blooded American, justice was served.

    DCW

  30. #30
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    7454

    Default

    It's hard for me to believe

    people are defending using a stun gun on a six year old. Amazing.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

Page 1 of 3 1 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •