Tasered Polish Man

[sideshow]

s

Edited March 19, 2008 by sideshow

[bush_cheney2004]

It's very odd that I get reprimanded for making a light hearted joke about the Polish people - a dark and humours comment regarding Tasing all of Warsaw buy hooking up wires to the plumbing on bath day - and saying "I don't like Poles" which was just silly talk......

You are a rookie here...learn how to play the game.

- the horrible video of some Amercan red neck garbage human - beating the life out of a poor female cop....and to play our emotions like out of tune violins even further...by adding comments that are warm and fussy liberalism - to para phrase "and to have the children watch this horror" - I suggest that this video is off topic - inflamatory and unfair to the poor man and his family who was taxered to death in Vancouver - the video should be pulled..it incites viewers - both male and female to hate - and to indirectly hate the Polish dead man....who had nothing to do what so ever with beating a female cop about the face..pull the video please.

Why would it incite hatred of the "Polish dead man" (he has a name: Robert Dziekanski)?

The video is in the public domain, and was a direct rejoinder to another member's video post from a Utah traffic stop and Taser incident.

Edited November 25, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

You make light of a very serious potential human rights abuse that may slowly be normalize in society - contain your base sillyness...."Americans often have the best toys" ?? Nuclear weapons are they toys ?

Yes, with fissile materials provided by Canada....thank you very much.

Spare me from the usual human rights abuse blather. Tasers fill the void that has long existed in police force escalation. They are "perfected" stun guns.

[Oleg Bach]

You are a rookie here...learn how to play the game.

Why would it incite hatred of the "Polish dead man" (he has a name: Robert Dziekanski)?

The video is in the public domain, and was a direct rejoinder to another member's video post from a Utah traffic stop and Taser incident.

Rookie! You're the rookie - only rookies attempt to pull rank on what is a virtual free speech and discussion board..then You try to do the double reverse in your retort in the fact that I did not know the dead mans name? As if to further marginalize my comments and views - as if I was a bad guy for speaking ill of the dead by not knowing the mans name - that's very transparent of you - Also if I be the rookie as you say and you are in some postion of self promoted high command - you would think that some one of your superiour moral and intellectual abilty - would have caught my very valid point - but instead you divert away from the issue not haveing the courage to face the fact that the cop beating video was not appropriate within this thread..but nnnnooooo...you got all arrogant to the point where you like some wanna be elitetist calls the exchange of information and the gaining of wisdom a game "learn how to play the game" - forgive my if you are but a teenager heroing it up on the net...you just made a fool of your self - and I had nothing to do with it - but of course you will blame me for you breach with reality.

[bush_cheney2004]

....you just made a fool of your self - and I had nothing to do with it - but of course you will blame me for you breach with reality.

Yet you are the one flopping about like a landed fish. You see, it's all about timing and context, which you have yet to establish here at MLW. Other members know pretty much how I roll....several don't like it, but they tolerate this token 'Merkin more or less because I represent the ugly Yankee that they love to hate....plus I don't shine them on with any pretense about morality.

Your move....Mr. New Member

Edited November 25, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Oleg Bach]

Yet you are the one flopping about like a landed fish. You see, it's all about timing and context, which you have yet to establish here at MLW. Other members know pretty much how I roll....several don't like it, but they tolerate this token 'Merkin more or less because I represent the ugly Yankee that they love to hate....plus I don't shine them on with any pretense about morality.

Your move....Mr. New Member

Glad to meet you - seems we are ships crossing under a bright new sun. I just spent as you may know over a year being the token Canadian - with the Yankies - and you are not typical of them or in the most remote way like the typcal grass roots American - they have heart and they have a sense of intelligent morality - if you be the token rep from the states - you are a disservice to the Canadian membership...and will never be excepted with your un-American attitute - in Canada - no more than your own - who I would bet have rejected you. If you are up here to generate hate against my American friends then you are not the token Yanky - you may as well...join up with Black water and be no ones friend...secondly - You had better be of service here - I have a citizenship and am a British subject....can't get over how you think it's cool to generate hate against your own nation - are you a nut? Nothing personal - or just immature andvery unwise.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... You had better be of service here - I have a citizenship and am a British subject....can't get over how you think it's cool to generate hate against your own nation - are you a nut? Nothing personal - or just immature andvery unwise.

I will let the MLW membership be the judge of that. Let's just say your self announced arrival and importance has been less than impressive. I am one of 300,000,000 Americans just in case you lost count.

Are you afraid of "hate".....don't be afraid of reality.

[Oleg Bach]

I will let the MLW membership be the judge of that. Let's just say your self announced arrival and importance has been less than impressive. I am one of 300,000,000 Americans just in case you lost count.

Are you afraid of "hate".....don't be afraid of reality.

Right away you form yourself into a primative pack of wolves you have yet to announce your alpha maleness too. Sorry my friend - I am not here to impress as you are - or depress as you are. To put it in plain language - I do not have the inclination to mentor you - nor am I taking on any new students. As far as YOU "letting" the MLW membership judge me - how kind and authoritarian of you. You may have 300 million - but you will be lucky to have 3 follow you. Things have changed and they are more aware and more bright than you imagine - America was the light of the world and she will be again - darkening that light with the likes of you and your ego will not work out - My mother who had seen the world rise and fall - refered to the attitude you present so proudly as "underdeveloped" - I am a man who has nothing and owns nothing - and can not be sold or bought - a free man - so - like I said - infinite consciousness is something you are genetically not pre-disposed too...so again sorry - you want ot learn - or do you want to wallow..in pride? Your choice.

[bush_cheney2004]

...I am a man who has nothing and owns nothing - and can not be sold or bought - a free man -

I know...."Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose" - Kris Kristofferson

so - like I said - infinite consciousness is something you are genetically not pre-disposed too...so again sorry - you want ot learn - or do you want to wallow..in pride? Your choice.

I am certainly learning something in the way of things to avoid. Rock on.....

[jbg]

Here is another police video with a "harmless" citizen and family...I'll bet the police officer wished she had a Taser...eh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lohN6F2jxFc

Typical post of a reactionary, right-wing, out of touch Zionist, colonialist and apartheidist bigot.

[jbg]

Huh? Signing the ticket is not payment, just a promise to pay or contest the citation in court. Once the police officer decided to cite for speeding, the story should have ended with a routine signature.

But noooooooooooooooooooooo, Mr. Obnoxious wanted to escalate the sitch, so our hero obliged.

Next case.....

How fuddy-duddy. Power to the people!!! Mao Mao Mao Tse Tung!!!

[Oleg Bach]

I know...."Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose" - Kris Kristofferson

I am certainly learning something in the way of things to avoid. Rock on.....

That's cheezy - a former helicopter pilot that could barely sing - Kristofferson the aging and foolish pot head buddy of that fake nomad - Willie Nelson "Maybe I didn't love you just as half as much as I should have" - maybe more fitting for you..seems I have you on the run..come back young fellow - I won't pick on you are disrespect you..lets be friends...I love America and Canada - can't believe I just said that. Just don't like extremism - radical moderation seems to be a good way to go - solutions and facing reality - the days of winners and losers are over - mutual co-operation - and what I notice with my vitual American friends is that they fully eccpepted me..no matter how wierd I could get..or unfocused..patients and time - with that you get results. I like to prosper when dealing with people in my mature years - and yes I am a jerk...curbing me may be a good idea on occasion...thanks for letting your guard down - my shield and sword will be left at the door also....looks like a wonderful Christmas coming up..I have a lot of hope - it's the only wealth I have.... good faith.....now I am going out to socialize..been reclusive for a while - time to live.

[jbg]

You make light of a very serious potential human rights abuse that may slowly be normalize in society - contain your base sillyness...."Americans often have the best toys" ?? Nuclear weapons are they toys ?

Serious human rights violation? Should the officers, when faced with danger and/or a fleeing suspect, be forced to resort to lead bullets? Would that make you happier?

[capricorn]

Serious human rights violation? Should the officers, when faced with danger and/or a fleeing suspect, be forced to resort to lead bullets? Would that make you happier?

From reading some of the comments on this thread, it sounds like some posters would like police officers to become social workers. Like finding out what's bothering an agitated or fleeing perp, or engaging in friendly banter and dialogue prior to making an arrest or taking restraining measures.

While I abhor abusive cops and denounce them, I like my cops to act decisively in protecting themselves and the public at large, especially me. If perps need someone to hold their hand after the cop has done his/her job, there is a plethora of do-good agencies available for that very purpose.

Let's not confuse the role of cop and social worker.

[Carinthia]

From reading some of the comments on this thread, it sounds like some posters would like police officers to become social workers. Like finding out what's bothering an agitated or fleeing perp, or engaging in friendly banter and dialogue prior to making an arrest or taking restraining measures.

While I abhor abusive cops and denounce them, I like my cops to act decisively in protecting themselves and the public at large, especially me. If perps need someone to hold their hand after the cop has done his/her job, there is a plethora of do-good agencies available for that very purpose.

Let's not confuse the role of cop and social worker.

They do receive training in social behaviour. They are trained to be able to differentiate between the ordinary joe and dangerous criminals. They are trained to assess all situations with calmness and logic. Unfortunately, the odd one seems to forget this training or can't be bothered to call on it. All it takes is one cop to lead the rest in to making an impulsively bad decision.

Edited November 25, 2007 by Carinthia

[jbg]

All it takes is one cop to lead the rest in to making an impulsively bad decision.

All it takes is one beating or bullet from a perp to wind up with a dead cop, who was just doing his job and planning on kissing his wife and kids again.

[Carinthia]

All it takes is one beating or bullet from a perp to wind up with a dead cop, who was just doing his job and planning on kissing his wife and kids again.

Perp or ordinary citizen who has a problem? Spare me the dramatics, please.

[jbg]

Perp or ordinary citizen who has a problem? Spare me the dramatics, please.

I choose the cop who's protecting my safety, and yours, unless of course you're a perp or uncontrollably insane.

[Guest American Woman]

From reading some of the comments on this thread, it sounds like some posters would like police officers to become social workers. Like finding out what's bothering an agitated or fleeing perp, or engaging in friendly banter and dialogue prior to making an arrest or taking restraining measures.

While I abhor abusive cops and denounce them, I like my cops to act decisively in protecting themselves and the public at large, especially me. If perps need someone to hold their hand after the cop has done his/her job, there is a plethora of do-good agencies available for that very purpose.

Let's not confuse the role of cop and social worker.

Excellent post, Capricorn. I agree with everything you said.

Cops are there to enforce the law. If someone questions being ticketed, they have the courts to sort it out and give their side. They don't have the right to question the cops; the cops aren't obligated to listen to their arguments and/or answer 20 questions. If people could get away with that, everyone would be doing it. The cops are the authority. Period. Anyone who has a problem with an officer's actions can take it up later with their superior officer and/or in court.

The guy in the speeding ticket taser incident was obviously argumentive and uncooperative. People talk about his having kids in the car. What kind of example was he setting for his own kids?

The sad fact is, people who are a threat to police officers don't have a sign on their foreheads so the cops know who is and who isn't a danger. Cops have been killed without any warning for something as routine as pulling someone over for speeding. If they value their lives, they have to approach every situation with caution. Anyone who doesn't recognize this is at fault. If they don't cooperate, and they expect cops to put up with that and put their concerns first, then they are in effect endangering police officers lives with those expectations.

What's going to happen with these videos and prejudgements, I'm afraid, is to deter a lot of good, conscientious people from becoming cops-- and we'll just be left with the hard-assed, abusive cops who don't give a damn; the very kind of cop that people are protesting. So people would be smart to think before judging/mouthing off, because if this starts to become the trend, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.

Edited November 25, 2007 by American Woman

[Carinthia]

Excellent post, Capricorn. I agree with everything you said.

Cops are there to enforce the law. If someone questions being ticketed, they have the courts to sort it out and give their side. They don't have the right to question the cops; the cops aren't obligated to listen to their arguments and/or answer 20 questions. If people could get away with that, everyone would be doing it. The cops are the authority. Period. Anyone who has a problem with an officer's actions can take it up later with their superior officer and/or in court.

The guy in the speeding ticket taser incident was obviously argumentive and uncooperative. People talk about his having kids in the car. What kind of example was he setting for his own kids?

The sad fact is, people who are a threat to police officers don't have a sign on their foreheads so the cops know who is and who isn't a danger. Cops have been killed without any warning for something as routine as pulling someone over for speeding. If they value their lives, they have to approach every situation with caution. Anyone who doesn't recognize this is at fault. If they don't cooperate, and they expect cops to put up with that and put their concerns first, then they are in effect endangering police officers lives with those expectations.

What's going to happen with these videos and prejudgements, I'm afraid, is to deter a lot of good, conscientious people from becoming cops-- and we'll just be left with the hard-assed, abusive cops who don't give a damn; the very kind of cop that people are protesting. So people would be smart to think before judging/mouthing off, because if this starts to become the trend, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.

It's unreasonable to expect people to act like robots and sheep. That will never happen and it's up to the trained cop to use common sense. They are supposed to be trained to defuse a situation, not incite and inflame with unnessary bullying. This guy obviously ran into one of those hard-assed, abusive cops, who don't give a damn, that you speak of, the kind that people are protesting about.

Edited November 25, 2007 by Carinthia

[Guest American Woman]

People in 'excited delirium' have been known to brush off the effects of a taser.

That said, it is clear that the studies on tasers were flawed because they did not take into account real life situations and the type of people that are likely to be tasered by police. For this reason we probably need to severly restrict the use of tasers. However, like lead paint, these conclusions about tasers are the result of bad experiences and we can't go back a blame police offiers who were told a taser is a innocuous device.

Just came across this article regarding "excited delirium" and taser policy-- RCMP revised taser policy to allow multiple jolts-- Excerpts (emphasis mine):

Three months before Robert Dziekanski was tasered, the RCMP adopted a change in force protocol that allows officers to fire multiple shocks to control people under certain circumstances.

Police say medical evidence shows that, without tasers, prolonged and dangerous struggles occur with people suffering from what they term "excited delirium." It prompted the force to release new rules in August allowing officers to use tasers multiple times to more quickly gain control.

The RCMP define excited delirium as a potentially fatal "state of extreme mental and physiological excitement that is characterized by extreme agitation, hyperthermia, hostility, exceptional strength and endurance without apparent fatigue."

Until August, officers trained to use stun guns were cautioned to avoid using them more than once because of concerns about health effects.

However, the force's belief that excited-delirium symptoms can escalate and cause death outweighed their worries about the impact of multiple shocks.

....RCMP familiar with the incident have hinted that the officers who responded believed him to fit that category.

One of the RCMP's trainers told The Globe and Mail that tasers are the "most humane way" to rein in people believed to be suffering from mental distress.

"Someone in a full-blown excited-delirium event cannot respond to you when you try to negotiate with them," Corporal Gregg Gilles, one of the RCMP's taser trainers based in British Columbia, said.

"We're telling officers if they think they're dealing with an excited-delirium event, if a second [taser] application will allow you to get them under control, use of a taser is best."

Officers are also taught that if they cannot handcuff a person they think is suffering from excited delirium a few seconds after the first taser shot, they should shoot again rather than resort to other methods of force, Cpl. Gilles said.

So it sounds as if the officers were likely simply following established procedure, in which case the procedure should be under question. The officers, if following established procedure, did nothing wrong. Again, the judgement/accusations/conclusions (murderers, executioners, etc) are mind boggling. I don't imagine the man's death was easy for the officers to deal with in the first place. The world judgement, on top of it, must be terrible.

Reminds me of the pre-judgement the lacrosse team accused of rape had to contend with in the U.S. not long ago. They were from Duke University, I believe, but the real tragedy is how completely innocent members of the team were tried and hung by the public before even being brought to trial. In this world of media exposure we have to take responsiblity NOT to judge soley on the snippets we get from the media.

Edited November 25, 2007 by American Woman

[jbg]

Reminds me of the pre-judgement the lacrosse team accused of rape had to contend with in the U.S. not long ago. They were from Duke University, I believe, but the real tragedy is how completely innocent members of the team were tried and hung by the public before even being brought to trial. In this world of media exposure we have to take responsiblity NOT to judge soley on the snippets we get from the media.

I agree with you on both counts, but the lacrosse episode was more like "Tawana Brawley". The overdose of political correctness made people automatically believe stories told by young black girls, however unlikely, and to thus ruin the lives of perfectly legitimate citizens.

The Taser episode is a different problem, relating to following procedures, I don't think a lacrosse team has "procedures" for a rape, for example. Either it happened or it didn't. The Taser episode definitely happened. Either the police should have used the Taser, they should have used other force or should have done nothing.

[Argus]

Serious human rights violation? Should the officers, when faced with danger and/or a fleeing suspect, be forced to resort to lead bullets? Would that make you happier?

This is a more complex question than most people have thus far allowed for. It touches on what we expect of our police officers. Do we expect them to physically restrain a person who refuses to obey orders or not? In the situation at the airport I would have thought four cops could have physically restrained this man without resorting to the taser (even bearing in mind we do not yet know the taser was responsible for his death). But my thinking is based on the old-fashioned concept of police as, in effect, muscle. I do not believe the police were in any particular danger of life and limb here.

But are we asking too much of modern police to tell them they are, in effect, "muscle"? Should they not be allowed to use weapons like this to secure the obedience of a lawful order rather than having to physically wrestle with a disobedient citizen? Are we being arrogant in saying, in effect "wrestle with him, even though you might get a little mussed up, because it's safer for the suspect". For that matter, do we even know it's safer for the suspect? A few people have died after being tasered, certainly, but people have died before in physical confrontations with police, as well. Violence has all sorts of unforeseen consequences on the human anatomy, especially one which is already damaged in some way.

Because it is evident that police, in many cases, are using the taser not out of fear for their physical safety but to compel obedience and submission even in cases where they would be in no danger themselves. The video of the woman tasered repeatedly during a traffic stop comes to mind, tasered even when her hands were cuffed and she was in the back seat of the police car.

I think we need to know what we expect of our police before we say when they can and cannot taser people.

[jbg]

Because it is evident that police, in many cases, are using the taser not out of fear for their physical safety but to compel obedience and submission even in cases where they would be in no danger themselves. The video of the woman tasered repeatedly during a traffic stop comes to mind, tasered even when her hands were cuffed and she was in the back seat of the police car.

I think we need to know what we expect of our police before we say when they can and cannot taser people.

I have not watched that video. However, I would have serious problems if police were not professionals whose judgment should generally be trusted. I disagree with the tasering of someone who is already neutralized. I agree, though, that people should obey an apparently lawful police directive, and understand that their recourse is to police supervisors or the Courts. Just as police are expected not to carry out capital punishment on the spot, I expect citizens not to make their own decisions about whether or not to obey police.

[Argus]

I have not watched that video. However, I would have serious problems if police were not professionals whose judgment should generally be trusted. I disagree with the tasering of someone who is already neutralized. I agree, though, that people should obey an apparently lawful police directive, and understand that their recourse is to police supervisors or the Courts. Just as police are expected not to carry out capital punishment on the spot, I expect citizens not to make their own decisions about whether or not to obey police.

Bear in mind police are often young men, a group often given to doing stupid things. Also bear in mind that police in previous instances have been known to give orders which were not lawful, to assume a power to direct which did not exist in law.

The APEC summit comes to mind, where police broadly abused the law in obedience to a PMO directive to not embarrass foreign visitors. Police cheerfully broke many laws while falsely arresting people who had committed no crime, and gave orders which were unlawful, then arrested people for not obeying them.

Edited November 25, 2007 by Argus