Jump to content

  •  

Photo

Should officers be armed with Tasers?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
413 replies to this topic

#401 meditate

meditate

    UKPOLICEONLINE Guru

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 2,902 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2013 - 07:20 AM

What I am trying to justify is that commenting on the actions of others is human nature and yes, the inquiry will look at all the facts. What you say I dont get is, I think what you dont get in that the actions of 'professionals' in some ways is dictated by its acceptability to the public. One of my observations is that you sometimes take comments as absolutes. If I recall correctly I stated that using taser on someone covered in petrol sounds like a non option to me - that is not stating they acted outside their boundaries. If I felt they had I probably would have said so. The rest of the posts thereafter are pretty much defending my opinion - and I am entitled to my opinion. It will be for the IPCC to decide based on their investigation, but that does not negate discussion in the meantime. One other thought is that if we (non police officers) were not 'allowed' to comment on what was reported then attitudes would not change - we only have to look at the reporting of news events where (as you would say) not all the facts are known to see that it has led change that would not have happened or, individuals being brought to account. This has been going on for years ranging from Rodney King to the latest incident where South African Police have been charged with murder. So my question to you would be do you not think it is more dangerous not to comment on reported actions whilst acknowledging we need to see what the official investigation throws up (whilst accepting that investigations do not always get it right either!)


Edited by meditate, 02 May 2013 - 07:21 AM.


#402 morek54

morek54

    UKPOLICEONLINE Regular

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 1,052 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 02 May 2013 - 09:15 AM

What I am trying to justify is that commenting on the actions of others is human nature and yes, the inquiry will look at all the facts. What you say I dont get is, I think what you dont get in that the actions of 'professionals' in some ways is dictated by its acceptability to the public. One of my observations is that you sometimes take comments as absolutes. If I recall correctly I stated that using taser on someone covered in petrol sounds like a non option to me - that is not stating they acted outside their boundaries. If I felt they had I probably would have said so. The rest of the posts thereafter are pretty much defending my opinion - and I am entitled to my opinion. It will be for the IPCC to decide based on their investigation, but that does not negate discussion in the meantime. One other thought is that if we (non police officers) were not 'allowed' to comment on what was reported then attitudes would not change - we only have to look at the reporting of news events where (as you would say) not all the facts are known to see that it has led change that would not have happened or, individuals being brought to account. This has been going on for years ranging from Rodney King to the latest incident where South African Police have been charged with murder. So my question to you would be do you not think it is more dangerous not to comment on reported actions whilst acknowledging we need to see what the official investigation throws up (whilst accepting that investigations do not always get it right either!)

Acceptable to you - or the public in general? Because I think that's something you don't really get: your own views are not necessarily representative of the public and indeed you will find many differing views out there. Whilst many will jump on the bang-wagon and slate the officers and deem their actions unacceptable, others will have greater sympathy and be more supportive of the Officers. Public opinion, or what the public find acceptable, is hardly a exact absolute. And ultimately, whether meeting with universal approval or not, the Police still have to make the very difficult choices of which I speak and shying away from those responsibilities because it may attract an adverse public reaction (in some quarters at least) is not always an option. If only things were so simple.

 

You shouldn't compare what has happened here with what happens in the states or South Africa. I appreciate you might liken us to our counterparts in other countries - but this matter will be afforded the greatest levels of scrutiny, irrespective of what is reported in media, which similar incidents elsewhere in the world simply would not attract.

 

There is a good deal of difference between debating something and passing a judgement, which goes beyond the facts known at the time. I have manged to debate this throughout without prejudging the Officers and more so, sticking to discussing the facts currently available. For instance, you have made repeated references to the taser being the cause of ignition, yet at this stage we do not know at what stage taser was even used or whether it was in fact the cause of ignition.

 

When someone, who has not got the required knowledge and training, comments that a particular course of action is an non-option, then as far as I'm concerned that is a criticism of the decisions made by the Officers. A suggestion that the Officers shouldn't have used taser, when in fact that is not strictly the case - and had you had greater insight before commenting then you might have considered your view more carefully.

 

You certainly have the right to an opinion. You can, if you choose, comment on whatever your choose to. Equally, it is the right of others to correct you if they feel you are wrong. My default position will always be to show support for Officers in situations like this. It's not because I think the Police are beyond criticism or because I think we are always right; but because I know the difficulties we face daily and the ever present potential for things to go wrong. There but for the grace of god go I. Tonight I may be called to deal with a situation, which may get the keyboard warriors tittle tattling tomorrow - and I would find that incredible frustrating and to a degree upsetting. Not least because I wouldn't be able to defend my actions and correct the inaccuracies of what was being said.

 

When all is said and done, at the heart of this, are real people. Human beings. Dedicated public servants. They should be afforded the benefit of the doubt until we know differently. The presumption should be that they did their very best in dealing with an extremely difficult situation and acted correctly - not to question that judgement with a degree of suspicion at the earliest opportunity.

 

I think I have made my view clear. I do not intend to comment further. 



#403 meditate

meditate

    UKPOLICEONLINE Guru

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 2,902 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2013 - 11:28 AM

I must correct you on one point. I stated that tasering a man doused in petrol sounds like a non option. I have not stated that the taser definitively was the ignition source. Sorry to be pedantic but your last post is attributing judgements I have not made.



#404 Aeolian

Aeolian

    UKPOLICEONLINE Associate Member

  • Resident Members
  • 74 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2013 - 06:46 PM

Actually it was Aeolian. :wink:

Me? I didn't start anything!! right...where's my taser?! ..........oh wait!.......



#405 Bart

Bart

    UKPoliceOnline Supreme Poster

  • Banned
  • 6,130 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 02 May 2013 - 07:04 PM

Got you bang to rights, the screen grab never lies, take him down. :wink:

#406 TangoOscar31

TangoOscar31

    UKPOLICEONLINE Veteran

  • Banned
  • 1,629 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Classified for the purposes of national security
  • Interests:Wimens

Posted 02 May 2013 - 07:07 PM

Book 'em Danno!

#407 znra251

znra251

    UKPOLICEONLINE Regular

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 561 posts

Posted 02 May 2013 - 07:31 PM

I must correct you on one point. I stated that tasering a man doused in petrol sounds like a non option. I have not stated that the taser definitively was the ignition source. Sorry to be pedantic but your last post is attributing judgements I have not made.

 

Why does it sound like a non option? Tasering a man doused with petrol who is sitting in a room doing nothing else is a non option, tasering a man doused in petrol who is coming at you with a weapon is a DEFINITE option. My life is more important than the life of a person trying to kill me. I will always risk their safety over mine if the risk is roughly equal.

 

Also would it be a non option to taser a man about to light himself with petrol. The chances of him igniting when he touches himself with a lighter/match are almost certain. If this is more likely than the ignition risk from a taser then surely taser is actually a viable option again?



#408 meditate

meditate

    UKPOLICEONLINE Guru

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 2,902 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2013 - 07:44 PM

Its covered in the previous posts. If the person presented a threat to yourself (or anyone else) then taser is an option. Tasering someone who is covered in petrol may mean you become his source of ignition. The fact he is threatening does not mean he will do it (but he may), but the risk of being responsible for setting him on fire by using taser I think is too high a price in the circumstances. If you set him of fire you have to live with that decision and not know whether he would have actually done it himself. 



Obviously others may think differently and opt to taser - I can only explain my point of view



#409 Cherry beret

Cherry beret

    UKPOLICEONLINE Full Member

  • Resident Members
  • 349 posts

Posted 02 May 2013 - 09:06 PM

Is this still going?

I don't know if I can take the irony much longer........

#410 operationfirestorm

operationfirestorm

    UKPOLICEONLINE Regular

  • Resident Members
  • 451 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Croydon
  • Interests:Anything interesting.

Posted 15 August 2013 - 03:56 PM

I suppose you could fail it if you died halfway through the day

 

hahahahaa sorry, just cracked me up! :smile:



#411 FH MSC

FH MSC

    UKPOLICEONLINE New Member

  • Resident Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:03 PM

I think if we all had Taser it would better!



#412 livinglegend

livinglegend

    I'm New !

  • Resident Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 11:46 PM

Im all for tasers, if your up against a large subject sometime cs spray just wont cut it



#413 GeorgeH

GeorgeH

    UKPOLICEONLINE Regular

  • Resident Members
  • 446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Saint Clair Shores, Michigan USA

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:35 AM

I agree.

#414 TheRidgeRanger

TheRidgeRanger

    UKPOLICEONLINE Associate Member

  • Resident Members
  • 66 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 09 January 2014 - 04:06 PM

Yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users