Police kill Polish man @ Vancouver Airport

[AbreuTime]

[ QUOTE ]
Wires,

Handling mentally ill teenage boys in a controlled setting is much different than handling random dudes in an airport. You knew the medical history of the kids you were around. You didn't need to worry about what kind of drugs the kids might be on or if the kid gets cut during the struggle are you being exposed to HIV or other blood-borne diseases. The cops need to make split second decisions with very limited information. If the guy in the video gets by the cops and starts running around the airport throwing stuff at by-standers the cops will be crucified for it.


[/ QUOTE ]
You're missing the point of the original post on proper techniques; proper takedown/restraint techniques will work on any individual if you have sufficient numbers (more people needed for larger/stronger suspects). The 5 police officers were trained in restraint, and instead, lazily applied the taser. Additionally, your strawman setting (he could bust past the officers and run around the airport "throwing stuff at by-standers" ) is disingenious. The man was calm and compliant at the time the taser was applied. No lives were in danger, especially not others at the airport. C'mon, stop sensationalizing. If he had charged the cops, they may have reason to tase him. This did not happen.

I also think you're greatly underestimating the difficulty of working with troubled teens. Knowing their medical history does not make it any easier to restrain a self-destructive kid from hurting himself or others.

Lastly, the airport IS a controlled setting, since it establishes that the guy was unarmed. He went through the metal detectors, right? Security far outnumbered him. So the risk was his size? They tased him because he was large... Is that a problem? It's a lazy police decision, and it may have caused someone's death.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
I spent 5 years working in adolescent mental health - usually in a residential setting. There were often large, aggressive teenage boys who needed to be physically restrained when they posed a risk to themselves or the other residents. Two of us would hold the teen while the other staff dealt with the other kids. We were trained so we were able to do these restraints effectively and safely. No one was ever hurt.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, Falcon is really sensationalizing here imo.

Tens of thousands of manual takedowns happen ever day in the Western world, everywhere from nightclubs to policing to mental health institutes. Many are more dangerous than this situation and few involve tasers. This guy was known to be unarmed and fairly peaceful compared to most. They tased him because they were lazy, and it killed him, either directly or indirectly.

Falcon: tasing is wrong because it's unnaturally painful and distressing and highly invasive, and possibly unsafe for certain people. That's why it's a last resort before firearms.

If you ask just about anyone if they'd prefer to be restrained or tasered and then restrained, I'm pretty sure they'd chose not to take the taser. It was unnecessary use of force by oversized cowards, and it killed a man. I don't know why you can't see that.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
The same people complaining about the cops killing this guy with the taser would be saying exactly the same things if the cops cracked this guy's skull during a manual takedown. You've set up a no-win situation where no matter what happens your sympathy for the victim overrides the ability to think critically about the situation.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why would it be necessary to crack someone's head open to take him down? This is not a necessary outcome.

What you are setting up is a no-win situation in which either way, the police are required to use excessive, even catastrophic force.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever the cops use force against someone there is the possibility of death. To somehow say it's safer for the cops, the victim, or the by-standers if 4 cops wrestle this guy to the ground is ludicrous.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well of course it isn't. We've got thousands of years of policing indicating otherwise, so no theoretical stretches are being involved here. However, a great deal of hyperbole is involved in your own argument.


[/ QUOTE ]

[Wires]

"Handling mentally ill teenage boys in a controlled setting is much different than handling random dudes in an airport. "

I acknowledged this in my original post but for some reason you choose the repeat it as though I was neglecting this fact. However I don't think they are as different as you may expect. These teens leave the residence and we don't always know what they are doing in the community and what they are bringing back into the residence. This is closer to an apple vs. apple comparison then you think.

"I very much doubt that if this guy got hurt during a takedown people in this thread would be posting "justifiable imo" wrt the cops."

Of course anyone who is anti-police is going to make noise no matter how justified the police were in their actions. Just like the blindly pro-police aren't going to be able to look at a case and be critical where police clearly circumvent procedure and injury results.

There are plenty of cases of police shootings and aggression that, after investigation, are deemed necessary and the general public accepts the result.

"If you want to post the takedown techniques you used on the kids go ahead. "

I'm not sure if you are actually interested or simply looking for fault but I was trained in CPI and UMAP(I've been through the course at least a dozen time) - the specific takedown method differed based on number of individuals involved as well as age and strength of the adolescent.
One thing that is clear is that pressure on the upper back, throat, or anywhere else that would restrict breathing should be avoided at all costs and never used when going by the book. I don't know how this directive changes for police officers.

[KotOD]

[ QUOTE ]

You're missing the point of the original post on proper techniques; proper takedown/restraint techniques will work on any individual if you have sufficient numbers (more people needed for larger/stronger suspects). The 5 police officers were trained in restraint, and instead, lazily applied the taser. Additionally, your strawman setting (he could bust past the officers and run around the airport "throwing stuff at by-standers" ) is disingenious. The man was calm and compliant at the time the taser was applied. No lives were in danger, especially not others at the airport. C'mon, stop sensationalizing. If he had charged the cops, they may have reason to tase him. This did not happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most ridiculous part of the story. The guy was ALREADY CONTAINED. All they had to do was have the cops stand guard outside the door until an administrative type could get someone who "spoke Russian" in there to figure out what was going on.

Consider this:

The cops were going to subdue the man, cuff him, place him under arrest, take him to jail or airport holding, and...

...get a TRANSLATOR in so that they could interview and interrogate him.

You guys can't see it, but I'm so doing the Lewis Black WTF?!??! look.

[KotOD]

[ QUOTE ]
Everybody already has come up with the alternate suggestion, and it has been repeated more than once. It's exactly the suggestion any reasonable person would expect to come up, no matter what side you're on -- that the cops do a manual take-down if necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

But only after the translator gives them the go ahead.

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everybody already has come up with the alternate suggestion, and it has been repeated more than once. It's exactly the suggestion any reasonable person would expect to come up, no matter what side you're on -- that the cops do a manual take-down if necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

But only after the translator gives them the go ahead.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is silly. The guy was throwing computer equipment around. What is the translator going to find out? "Hello officers, let me greet you in the traditional Polish manner of smashing appliances."

[R*R]

In 10 hours he spent 15 seconds throwing 2 items. That's it. He was not throwing numerous items for a lengthy period. From what I understand he dumped a computer and threw a small table. That's it. And nothing was thrown at a person.

[Peter666]

You make it sound as if there is a huge difference between tasering someone and taking them down manually. Yet you yourself were pontificating about the ease at which one can break a human neck.

There is far more likelyhood of injury to both parties with the take down method. Also, the take down often results in having to escalate the situation to batons or tasers anyway.

What would people be saying if a cop was accidentally killed or badly cirppled while taking someone down, when a taser could have been employed instead?

[LazyBob]

What would people be saying if a cop was accidentally killed or badly cirppled while taking someone down, when a taser could have been employed instead?

ofc we dont want this to happen, but this doesnt mean cops can kill people couse they are to lazy to do their job.