Don't taze me drone!

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]

One of the biggest Taser representatives outside the US base has declared the company's intention to produce and sell internationally a small airborne drone version of the weapon that can administer electrical jolts of 50,000 volts.

http://digg.com/offbeat_news/They_Li...come_A_Reality
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...q42Tcis4BRjxuw


[/ QUOTE ]

[FortunaMaximus]

Shocking.

Of course there's dispute over the use of tasers. They do carry a hell of a jolt without being lethal. Would you rather the cops in those situations used bullets instead? Someone dies once in awhile, usually as a combination of the jolt and whatever's in the individual's system. It doesn't mean this isn't a better alternative than being shot with lethal force.

The alternative is to let criminals do what they want. You can't give the cops wiffle bats and manuals on how to stop a criminal by talking to him. Sometimes this kind of force becomes a necessity, especially with violent or psychotic criminals.

[Hopey]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you rather the cops in those situations used bullets instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

So a cop only has two options to choose from? Shooting someone or zapping him with 50,000 volts?

[ QUOTE ]
The alternative is to let criminals do what they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it isn't. What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[ QUOTE ]

You can't give the cops wiffle bats and manuals on how to stop a criminal by talking to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would you rather the cops in those situations used bullets instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

So a cop only has two options to choose from? Shooting someone or zapping him with 50,000 volts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, not in every situation, but violent situations where the criminal is also armed with a weapon, be it knife, bat, etc. What do you suggest the cops do? I don't disagree there are situations in where the taser is overused, and certainly the application needs to be looked at. They shouldn't use it at their convenience but in dangerous situations.

[ QUOTE ]
The alternative is to let criminals do what they want.

[ QUOTE ]
No, it isn't. What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

They shot more criminals than they should've. They just have a now less lethal option that still carries lethal force when it's applied to the wrong individual. They'd use nightsticks and their own bodies to force a criminal to submit, and when that didn't work, they would be forced to shoot them.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You can't give the cops wiffle bats and manuals on how to stop a criminal by talking to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Violent and psychotic criminals do not react well to a gentle tone of voice and perusasion. When well into a course of action, they're notoriously difficult to stop. The degree of difficulty goes up quite a bit when they're armed.

It's a distasteful alternative, tasering, and probably benefits officers more than it does the criminal, since tasering is not a gentle alternative, but it is less lethal than beating the criminal to death or shooting him. Bear in mind I'm considering situations where violence is guaranteed to happen.

I don't agree with causal use of tasering just because the option is open to the officers. I'm also not sure what to make of the fact they'd use it to stop hostile crowds, and probably would lean towards not using it in those situations.

But cops do need non-lethal alternatives when in situations with violent offenders and until something better comes up, tasering is basically better than using bullets.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
But cops do need non-lethal alternatives when in situations with violent offenders and until something better comes up, tasering is basically better than using bullets.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do they taser old women then? who have no weapon of any kind?

[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But cops do need non-lethal alternatives when in situations with violent offenders and until something better comes up, tasering is basically better than using bullets.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do they taser old women then? who have no weapon of any kind?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a requirement. All recruits must do that at least once to pass the academy. It is quite like when rhetoric students must make one sweeping generalization based on outliers to become political debaters.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[/ QUOTE ]

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[/ QUOTE ]




[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, there was a time in this country when you would be beaten to a bloody pulp, not tazed.

You people watch entirely too many Andy Griffith reruns.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[/ QUOTE ]




[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, there was a time in this country when you would be beaten to a bloody pulp, not tazed.

You people watch entirely too many Andy Griffith reruns.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. yeah, now with tasers around, all those bad cops are angels.

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[WhoIam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What did cops do before the invention of the taser? Were they running around shooting everyone who looked sidewise at them?

[/ QUOTE ]




[/ QUOTE ]What's the thing in his right hand?