quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

--FR--

I wasn't there, so I don't know what happened, but "the kid charged and so he was tased" story is only one version of what happened that night. A version given by a group of cops that had just killed someone (rightly or wrongly).

There is a second version, given by the kid that was supposed to be the lookout. He said the cops had caught the tagger and had "thrown him up against the wall" shortly before the tagger fell to the ground. If that is the case, then the cops had already initiated physical contact with the suspect, and if he was tased after being thrown against the wall it was most likely unnecessary.

Now, who is most likely to have a need to embellish their story; cops that may have just used a taser unnecessarily on someone resulting in that someone's death, or some kid having just witnessed the event?

I'm not saying it happened in this case, but cops can and often do lie to cover their ass, so I'm unwilling to simply automatically assume that their version is the true version.

I have zero love for taggrs, but I also have zero love for dishonest cops.

yes cops can and have lied, but so have kids. Are you suggesting you can't think of any reasons why that boy might have made up shit?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Lucy mentioned the video of the 18 year old who was killed AND expressed her dismay at the actions of the cops a day or so after it happened on another thread. At the time, only one person mentioned it as being outrageous... Very few people give a shit about what happens outside the borders of the usa.
No IM really not using third person speech
just sayin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Lucy mentioned the video of the 18 year old who was killed AND expressed her dismay at the actions of the cops a day or so after it happened on another thread. At the time, only one person mentioned it as being outrageous... Very few people give a shit about what happens outside the borders of the usa.
No IM really not using third person speech
just sayin

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

1.
Tazer use- no doubt has to be examined- and re-thought-- not so much per this death- but the many other deaths. Particular old and disabled folks.

2. Cities, and towns, need a way to difuse tagging. We need less of it. I dont care if someone is painting the mona lisa- there is a thing as pollution. My town- decided- we dont want to over do- the signs here. So I was told I could not have a no trucks sign for my street- however last week- a "slow kids" sign showed up. (the kids are not slow- they are fast at playing on the side street)

3. Youth who want anarcky- who want to rebel- need better outlets. Does that area have a skate park? We do- and I was one of the protesters to make that happen. We also have alot of ball teams and leagues. Most the kids on my block- (there are 20) are in sports. As they get older I do worry about vandalism. For now they are good. Tho last week 2 of them got bit by the new neighbors pit bull. I would like to see something done about the sale of paints. Why should kids be able to buy it? I am often against the govt telling people what to do- but it seems that society is losing its manners. Freedom of expression does not mean harming the public space, or another person.


4. The taggers could make a bold statement in Miami- they could volunteer to clean up the sites. Maybe in return for this- the city can offer them a skate park.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tantalust

In the US, is it the law that a person must subject themselves to arrest whenever an agent of the law demands ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Heres the post ladies
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4510813

BTW..I hope you both have a great day:)
I wasnt snarkin, just giving background on what I had posted , why and when
enjoy the park Boi

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003



Absolutely not. What I'm saying is that of the two versions told, the cops are the ones with more reason to falsify what they said. .

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


the kid had avoided contact for the whole chasing,
.
If I was alone I don't know if I used the taser or not in that situation, probably only if the person I was chasing was bigger than me, but overnumbering I would for sure stepped back so my colleague could takle from flanks. Does it put me in danger? I think remotely but anyway for me this would be my duty instead using a painfull and dangerouse weapon.

I'm going to type this slowly so you can understand it.

He was running toward the cop (otherwise, he would have taken the shot in the ass not the chest)
It was dark.
Does that put you in danger? Damn right it does because it's DARK and you don't know what is in his hands.
Ever been cut with a knife? I have. Being cut superficially isn't that bad, the healing is a bitch. Taking one in the guts I have heard is anywhere from excruciating to fatal.
With the effective range of a tazer (under 20 feet) you have a half second to act.

The decedent was committing a crime (stupid decision #1)
The decedent led the cops on a long foot chase (stupid decision #2)
He then ran AT the officers instead of giving up (stupid decision #3)

Strike 1
Strike 2
Strike 3 He's out and chalk another one up for Darwin.

Never give the other guy an even chance if you want to go home to your family.

I understood what your point is, it's just I don't agree with that.
I told you what I would have done in that situation, do you think I'm stupid for that? fine, maybe I am.
Is it what I told the behaviour my culture and the law I live under require in this situation? yes, so for me it's natural to see it this way.

You did tell us what you would do. You said you would step back and let your colleague take care of it. And then you go on to tell us that you would do that because that is what your culture and law require. So if everyone in your group is following that same thought and you all step back and let someone else handle it, who is actually going to stand up and deal with the situation?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

The money isnt there, but the correlation between tazing incidents/deaths and otherwise, is that 90 % of the "victims" were mentally unstable
Torontos mental healthcare was decimated in the 90s by the cons, NOW its being noticed and changed.
Its more important to lobby for a casino

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83


the kid had avoided contact for the whole chasing,
.
If I was alone I don't know if I used the taser or not in that situation, probably only if the person I was chasing was bigger than me, but overnumbering I would for sure stepped back so my colleague could takle from flanks. Does it put me in danger? I think remotely but anyway for me this would be my duty instead using a painfull and dangerouse weapon.

I'm going to type this slowly so you can understand it.

He was running toward the cop (otherwise, he would have taken the shot in the ass not the chest)
It was dark.
Does that put you in danger? Damn right it does because it's DARK and you don't know what is in his hands.
Ever been cut with a knife? I have. Being cut superficially isn't that bad, the healing is a bitch. Taking one in the guts I have heard is anywhere from excruciating to fatal.
With the effective range of a tazer (under 20 feet) you have a half second to act.

The decedent was committing a crime (stupid decision #1)
The decedent led the cops on a long foot chase (stupid decision #2)
He then ran AT the officers instead of giving up (stupid decision #3)

Strike 1
Strike 2
Strike 3 He's out and chalk another one up for Darwin.

Never give the other guy an even chance if you want to go home to your family.

I understood what your point is, it's just I don't agree with that.
I told you what I would have done in that situation, do you think I'm stupid for that? fine, maybe I am.
Is it what I told the behaviour my culture and the law I live under require in this situation? yes, so for me it's natural to see it this way.

You did tell us what you would do. You said you would step back and let your colleague take care of it. And then you go on to tell us that you would do that because that is what your culture and law require. So if everyone in your group is following that same thought and you all step back and let someone else handle it, who is actually going to stand up and deal with the situation?

You didn't understood what I meant, maybe I haven't used the proper words, if someone charges has less controll on his boody than a person that stands if you move in the opposite direction at an almost equal speed you can control the distance and someway fool him as he will expose himself, as this was not a rugby match where is considered no fairplay to pass the ball to avoid a tackle than in that situation I would have kept controlling the boy from his fron but avoiding contact while my other colleagues could just grab him from the sides, it's not cowardice just an alternative way that doesn't involve tazing, it's what a torero does in a corrida or a fencer does in an assoult or what you do in judo, you move back to exploit your opponent, so the half second that hillwilliam extimated will get 2 or 3 seconds where you can also gain control.
Than what is the legal system in my country you can react only to actual threats and not presumed so the: "it was night so he may or may not have a knife or gun" concept doesn't work, it works this way can you see a weapon? if yes ok use yours if no then is him a danger for a third party safety having a violent behaviour? yes ok use your weapon, no then suspect safety is police officer concern and has to continue the chase untill he can grab the suspect without risks for him and the suspect or a third party, in this case the threat to safety was just presumed as he was not drawing any weapon and he was not involved in a violent crime and since that moment ran away, and by the way the concept that so called antisocial behaviour indicate a danger for people safety is something i connect much more with DDR and USSR.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

http://rt.com/usa/hundreds-mourn-miami-teen-345/

assassinated. hmm

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83





You didn't understood what I meant, maybe I haven't used the proper words, if someone charges has less controll on his boody than a person that stands if you move in the opposite direction at an almost equal speed you can control the distance and someway fool him as he will expose himself, as this was not a rugby match where is considered no fairplay to pass the ball to avoid a tackle than in that situation I would have kept controlling the boy from his fron but avoiding contact while my other colleagues could just grab him from the sides, it's not cowardice just an alternative way that doesn't involve tazing, it's what a torero does in a corrida or a fencer does in an assoult or what you do in judo, you move back to exploit your opponent, so the half second that hillwilliam extimated will get 2 or 3 seconds where you can also gain control.Than what is the legal system in my country you can react only to actual threats and not presumed so the: "it was night so he may or may not have a knife or gun" concept doesn't work, it works this way can you see a weapon? if yes ok use yours if no then is him a danger for a third party safety having a violent behaviour? yes ok use your weapon, no then suspect safety is police officer concern and has to continue the chase untill he can grab the suspect without risks for him and the suspect or a third party, in this case the threat to safety was just presumed as he was not drawing any weapon and he was not involved in a violent crime and since that moment ran away, and by the way the concept that so called antisocial behaviour indicate a danger for people safety is something i connect much more with DDR and USSR.