In light of the recent attention paid to individuals dying in custody after being tasered by police, I would have thought that the sue of these weapons would have lessened. As the risks posed by tasers become more and more clear, would it not have been prudent to avoid and/or lessen their use? It seems to me that tasers are become more of a risk than using firearms to bring order to a situation.
Well, apparently not, seeing a s a 17 year old boy has died in Winnipeg after being tasered by police there. While I do concede that he was holding a knife, surely there could have been a better way to bring him under control that would not have seen him lose his life. If they had shot him in the foot or arm (while by no means ideal), he would have likely stopped struggling and would still be alive.
Tasers interfere with far too many biological functions from the heart to lungs, and beyond. Surely a better, less threatening and risky solution can be achieved. Too many people have died to continue with the status quo.
3 comments:
You obviously don't live in Manitoba. The police force just went through a trying ordeal because they shot and killed a teen wielding a screw driver. The teen lunged at the officer and the officer was backed up against a snowbank so he had no choice but to shoot. Because of that officers are reluctant to use their guns.
Now ask yourself. How many deaths have been prevented by using the tasers? Of course that's not news. It's only news when the taser kills someone.
And finally, kids walking around with weapons intent on injuring or killing someone don't get any sympathy from me.
The Police did the appropriate thing. Their only other choice in diffusing this situation was to shoot the youth. They chose the seemingly safer option. Period.
When faced with a weapon, the police are justified in using force to take down a belligerent suspect. In the days prior to tazers this suspect would have been shot - and not have the chance of survival afforded by the tazer.
Having said that, I do strongly believe that we need to monitor and control the use of the tazer. The situation in Vancouver International Airport was a clear example of where a tazer should never have been used. There were 4 officers on scene, with more than adequate strength to take down a weary traveler.
It is the situation which should dictate the usage - and the presence/absence of a weapon. While the tazer can kill, so can a suspect who is inadvertently asphyxiated when he is held down by an officer, with a knee to the back, etc. Extreme discretion is needed - maybe the shock needs to be taken down a notch, or adjusted according to the situation.
I'm with the police on this one, if the facts - as reported - are accurate.
Ban tasers & bring back the glocks.No more pissing around with little darlings who are only having a bit of fun.
Post a Comment