Don't taze me, sonny!

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

In NYC alone there were over 50,000.

Where the hell do you get such ridiculous numbers? The number of murders (not just gun-related, but all murders) in New York City last year was 522. That's a far cry from your 50,000.

[Needlefeet]

Eh. Who gives a fuck. Just kill the guy. Saves an argument too. One less criminal in the world.

Not saying the old lady should've been shot. I'm saying when someone has a gun or is threatening lethal force.

If I've missed something, apologies. I just skimmed through. You guys are posting too much for my lazy eyes to read.

[Tam Li Hua]

Cpt. Sternn: Sometimes I have to wonder what goes on in that head of yours. O_o..

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

In NYC alone there were over 50,000.

I'm not a statistics expert, but it seems to me that if there were that many deaths just in NYC, then the city would be a virtual ghost town by now.

I think it would take a plague of epic proportions in order to bring down that many New Yorkers. :/

[zerademark]

Originally Posted by Tam Li Hua

I'm not a statistics expert, but it seems to me that if there were that many deaths just in NYC, then the city would be a virtual ghost town by now.

I think it would take a plague of epic proportions in order to bring down that many New Yorkers. :/

Working on it Mr Tam, so far nothing succesfull...

[Malice In Wonderland]

Originally Posted by zerademark

Mr Tam

Possibly the only thing you've said as of yet that I like.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Seth Whisper

This means that there is a gun store on every corner. You don't have to go to a club to shoot a gun. EVERYONE and their mother has a gun in the U.S. so cops have to have guns too.

We also ride dinosaurs here. You wouldn't know about that, what with living all the way on the other side of the ol' "pond", so you best keep your mouth shut about things you don't understand.

Originally Posted by CptSternn

In NYC alone there were over 50,000.

49,500 of them were renegade dinosaurs though.

[Beneath the Shadows]

People in America kill each other with guns.

People in the UK kill each other by blocking ambulances.

[CrimsonPythonidae]

Seth Whisper said: "I saw a guy last week get tazed three times and still push two BIG cops off him....if he had a weapon they would have shot him dead on the spot instead of using two tazers on him at once before finally bringing him down. You are so obviously ignorant of how law enforcement work."

Did you see the guy's alleged crime also? Would his being killed in the street, or wherever they were, have been a fitting punishment? Good thing he didn't have a weapon ay.

[CptSternn]

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/20...H_GRAPHIC.html

The total number for the last year posted (2006) was over 30,000 for the US. There was over 64,000 other incidents where people were shot, but not killed.

[CptSternn]

This thread seems to be moving towards a gun rights thread.

Lets not forget, this is about a 72 year old great-grandmother getting tasered by a cop.

I say let everyone watch the dam cam video and post their thoughts...

http://videosift.com/video/72-Year-O...sh-Cam-Footage

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/20...H_GRAPHIC.html

The total number for the last year posted (2006) was over 30,000 for the US. There was over 64,000 other incidents where people were shot, but not killed.

Love how you can't post factual information until you get called on it. 30,000 in the entirety of the U.S. is still a far cry from 50,000 in New York City alone.

Originally Posted by CptSternn

This thread seems to be moving towards a gun rights thread.

Lets not forget, this is about a 72 year old great-grandmother getting tasered by a cop.

I say let everyone watch the dam cam video and post their thoughts...

http://videosift.com/video/72-Year-O...sh-Cam-Footage

We already saw all that, minus a few seconds of standing around. She was clearly resisting arrest.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

We already saw all that, minus a few seconds of standing around. She was clearly resisting arrest.

So you support the officer who tased the 72 year old great grandmother then?

[Pineapple_Juice]

I think she deserved it. He told her five times. It's not like she's frail. She looks fifty something and she keeps saying "I'm 72, I'm 72" like that means it's okay to speed. I'm 20-what the fuck's that got to do with anything? If she hadn't been such a quacked out bitch about it she wouldn't have got tasered, and I can't believe she'd go on national television and say she was in no way being non compliant.

Not only is she a bitch, she's a liar too. I'd have tased her ass twice.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

STOP IT STOP IT STOP IT!!!!

OK, I'm going to formally correct this once. It's a stupid pet peeve but in the first page it caught me ten times at least.

A TASER IS NOT A NON LETHAL WEAPON.
A NIGHTSTICK IS NOT A NON LETHAL WEAPON.
A BEAN BAG IN A GUN IS NOT A NON LETHAL WEAPON.

Go talk to a cop and ask what they're called.
LESS LETHAL.

Basically meaning you have a higher chance of surviving. If I fire a bean bag in your neck I WILL break your trachea, if I fire a stun gun directly into your chest I can EASILY give you a heart attack, and if I hit you in the temple with a nightstick you can bet your ass I can kill you.

Is this a minor point? Not quite.
He used what, given the circumstances, can and by anyone with a brain should be considered as LETHAL FORCE. The average police Taser has a peak of 50,000 volts and a consistent average of 2000 volts. How much do you think you would need to kill an old woman?

Bit less than that I would recon.

Shit, one good sucker punch might have killed the old lady, and he light her up like a Christmas tree.

Nice guy...

Jesus, watch the video. She didn't make any attack at him. She didn't swipe at him. She just tried to get back in her car. Seriously, the taser was not needed. Tasers are used when a cop feels like he is in danger. If that cop was scared of that lady, he doesn't get to be a cop. In fact, he might as well turn in his testicles right now.

[Corpsey]

I advocate the above post.

[Still Jack]

The cop is out of order and the woman is too.
If you get clocked for speeding:
1. Admit it.
2. Say you're sorry.
3. Pay the fine.
4. Drive off at a safe pace.

Tazing the woman was unnecessary, but refusing to sign the speeding ticket was too.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

Since when are tazers supposed to replace guns? That's a crock of shit. Guns are, by their very nature, lethal weapons. Tazers are made with the intention of a non-lethal method of subduing an individual.

Says someone that has probably never had a calf muscle make contact with one strand of electric fence.

It maybe a Less-Lethal method but that doesn't say there isn't pain involved.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Says someone that has probably never had a calf muscle make contact with one strand of electric fence.

If by "never had a calf muscle make contact with one strand of electric fence" you mean "pissed on one," then yeah.

It maybe a Less-Lethal method but that doesn't say there isn't pain involved.

I don't believe I ever said it would be painless. Indeed, no one made any such claim.

[Saya]

I'm having problems watching videos on my computer right now, but I've read in several places that in the video she does agree to sign it, but by then he shoved her away from the side of the road:

The woman gets out of the truck and walks along the side of the road, close to the fog line separating the shoulder from the traffic lane.

“Give me the [expletive] thing and I’ll sign it,” she tells Bieze, but the officer has already told her she is being arrested. When Winkfein strays close to the traffic lane, the officer pushes her onto the shoulder.

“You’re gonna shove a 72-year-old woman?” Winkfein yells at him.

“If you don’t step back, you’re gonna be Tased,” Bieze says.

That’s when Winkfein said, “Go ahead. Tase me.”

Even then, Bieze did not use the Taser he had out and ready. He attempted to grab her, but Winkfein twisted away.

“Step back or you’re gonna be Tased, ma’am,” Bieze says again.

“I dare you,” she said.

Winkfein then decided she was leaving and tried to walk back to her truck.

“I’m getting back in my car,” she said.

“You’re gonna be Tased,” Bieze said, blocking her path.

“I’m getting back in my car,” she insists.

“No, ma’am,” he says.

That’s when he finally fired the Taser and Winkfein went down screaming.

“Now put your hands behind your back!” Bieze orders the woman, who has fallen out of the picture. “Put your hands behind your back, or you’re gonna be Tased again!”

Bieze finally took Winkfein into custody and charged her with resisting arrest.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/31202935/

She was being mean, but using language and being like that doesn't mean you can potentially give her a heart attack. He also had the option of writing "REFUSED TO SIGN" on the ticket, the ticket is still valid that way. Even if he still wanted to arrest her its disheartening to know that a police officer can't overpower a seventy two year old and has to shock her. I'm sure the police deal with belligerent people all the time, but whether one is swearing or being silent, it shouldn't make them angry enough to use a taser when there are several other safer options.

[Pineapple_Juice]

She was quite obviously attempting to use her age as a way to get out of getting a ticket and being arrested. If it was as easy as saying "No officer, I don't want a ticket. I'll be leaving now" then more people would do it. He did what he was supposed to do-what other methods do you suggest he use? He can shoot her, he can beat her with his stick, or he can tase her. Out of the three, I'd say tasing is the least painful.
You know, if he tried to just grab her and hold her down he'd be facing a big fat sexual assault lawsuit right now because she seems like the cunty type who'd do that. "Assaulting a poor defenseless innocent old granny", my ass.
She's a stupid liar, she thinks she's above the law, and she deserved what she got. It's got nothing to do with the cop being angry, it's got to do with him doing his job. If it was anyone else, someone younger, nobody would care. They'd say it was justified.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

She was quite obviously attempting to use her age as a way to get out of getting a ticket and being arrested. If it was as easy as saying "No officer, I don't want a ticket. I'll be leaving now" then more people would do it.

If she did leave, do you really think the ticket and incident would just go away? You are not required by law to sign the ticket. He could have gotten in his cars and left, and they would send a summons later. Happens all the time.

He did what he was supposed to do-what other methods do you suggest he use? He can shoot her, he can beat her with his stick, or he can tase her. Out of the three, I'd say tasing is the least painful.

If he did what he was supposed to do, then this thread wouldn't exist. He was under no obligation to do anything. She wasn't a threat to anyone and wasn't doing anything wrong. Once he notified her that he was writing a ticket, she could have left with or withou signing it and with or without the ticket. It's not like they didn't know who she was and where she lived. The summons for court would have made it to her home and there would have been no issue.

You know, if he tried to just grab her and hold her down he'd be facing a big fat sexual assault lawsuit right now because she seems like the cunty type who'd do that. "Assaulting a poor defenseless innocent old granny", my ass.

Now your pulling stuff out of thin air and blaming her for it. What do you have against grannys?

She's a stupid liar, she thinks she's above the law, and she deserved what she got.

A liar? It's a video - how exactly is she lying? Again, 'deserved what she got' - if that were true it wouldn't have made the headline news here in Ireland.

It's got nothing to do with the cop being angry, it's got to do with him doing his job.

If you think a cops job is to beat old women up, then you have issues.

If it was anyone else, someone younger, nobody would care. They'd say it was justified.

Probably. But thats a pretty ignorant comment. I mean, what if she was really young, like two years old. Is that young enough by your standards to hit with 50,000 volts? Age obviously is a factor.

If your in diapers, then you should not be tased.

As I and many others said above - if a police officer cannot restrain a 70+ year old 90 pound great grandmother without resorting to using a taser, then he shouldn't be a police officer.

If he cannot write a traffic ticket without using a taser, then that is another sign the man should not be a police officer.

[Beneath the Shadows]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

If she did leave, do you really think the ticket and incident would just go away? You are not required by law to sign the ticket. He could have gotten in his cars and left, and they would send a summons later. Happens all the time.

The he would be failing to do his job.

If he did what he was supposed to do, then this thread wouldn't exist. He was under no obligation to do anything.

Yes he was. In the state of Texas, if someone refuses to sign a ticket, the issuing cop is required to arrest them.

She wasn't a threat to anyone and wasn't doing anything wrong.

She was speeding. That is both illegal and a threat to other motorists as well as herself.

Once he notified her that he was writing a ticket, she could have left with or withou signing it and with or without the ticket.

As I've already explained, no she couldn't.

A liar? It's a video - how exactly is she lying? Again, 'deserved what she got' - if that were true it wouldn't have made the headline news here in Ireland.

I take it, then, that you didn't actually watch the video I linked to in my original post.

If you think a cops job is to beat old women up, then you have issues.

If you think that it's not a cop's job to arrest someone when the law tells them otherwise, then you have issues.

Probably. But thats a pretty ignorant comment. I mean, what if she was really young, like two years old. Is that young enough by your standards to hit with 50,000 volts? Age obviously is a factor.

If your in diapers, then you should not be tased.

If she were two, this wouldn't have happened, obviously.

As I and many others said above - if a police officer cannot restrain a 70+ year old 90 pound great grandmother without resorting to using a taser, then he shouldn't be a police officer.

And as others have said above, if he had used another method of restraint then he'd be criticized for that, instead. Additionally, if he had done nothing, then he wouldn't be doing his job. No-win scenario.

If he cannot write a traffic ticket without using a taser, then that is another sign the man should not be a police officer.

If the woman can't accept responsibility for her actions behind the wheel, then that is a sign that she should not be driving.

And what do you mean "another sign?"

[Despanan]

I demand to see more old ladies getting tazed. This is goddamn comedy gold.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

The he would be failing to do his job.

I didn't know a cops job was to use less-lethal weapons on elderly women.

Yes he was. In the state of Texas, if someone refuses to sign a ticket, the issuing cop is required to arrest them.

Arrest and taser is two different things.

She was speeding. That is both illegal and a threat to other motorists as well as herself.

You really want to make that argument? If you personally feel that speeding is dangerous enough to warrant po9lice using lethal weapons to stop it, then you are seriously ill.

If she were two, this wouldn't have happened, obviously.

So you further my point - age IS a factor. What makes a 70+ year old any more deadly than a 2 year old.

And as others have said above, if he had used another method of restraint then he'd be criticized for that, instead. Additionally, if he had done nothing, then he wouldn't be doing his job. No-win scenario.

Again you try and push a hypothetical as fact. How do you know what would have happened had he tried another method of restraint? Thats like arguing you know what would happen in the future is someone did something different than what they choose to do - are you able to predict the future now?

If the woman can't accept responsibility for her actions behind the wheel, then that is a sign that she should not be driving.

If your again trying to say motorists should accept being hit with lethal force when they speed, then again I must say you have issues. What if she had died? What if using a taser on a 70+ year old grandmother had killed her? Would you still be here vehemently defending the police action to kill her? As stated above, tasers are less-lethal weapons, meaning there is always a chance the person could die when used. Do you [i]really feel killing speeders is ok? Killing 70+ year old women grandmothers is ok? You seem to be defending that course of action which is the same as defending what could have happened.

But hey - if you like the idea of the police using less-lethal force on elderly, women, and children - all in the name of keeping people from going a few miles over the speed limit, then you should lobby your local politicians in support of laws that give the police the right to kill people when they are caught speeding a few miles over the limit, as that is exactly what you are supporting whole heartily here mate.