Man dies after police taser

[Santa]

This isn't about retribution for a burglary. The Police aren't judge and jury, and they aren't there to meet out punishment.

 

The dead person must have been constituting an immediate threat to their well being for them to discharge the taser. Had he not, they would have presumably just arrested him and let him be dealt with through the proper channels.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

This isn't about retribution for a burglary. The Police aren't judge and jury, and they aren't there to meet out punishment.

 

The dead person must have been constituting an immediate threat to their well being for them to discharge the taser. Had he not, they would have presumably just arrested him and let him be dealt with through the proper channels.

 

And that is what needs to come out..that proper procedures were followed and the circumstance justified the use of the taser, then so be it. We all know that sometimes the polcie get it wrong but mainly they get it right and I hope that this is one of those occasions...I'm very confident that the police will be found to be blameless.

[Andyregs]

The last bloke the police tasered during an act of cannibalism,died also,mind you that was probably for the best.

 

Tasers have been used over 10,000 times in the last 12 months. We only get to hear about the times it kills someone.

Im just glad we are having the debate on the use of tasers by the police instead of guns. Imagine if guns were used instead. If the police were in danger, and they used it appropriately, then thats fair enough.

[geosname]

If he was inside and police were waiting outside why not send a dog in?

[bycars rob]

The police carry bodycams now so we will know what happened soon and whether their actions were justified. In a complete aside I think one of the neighbours interviewed on tv was Kevin Finneys brother.

[Andyregs]

If he was inside and police were waiting outside why not send a dog in?

 

Why put the dog at risk.

[Conrad]

The police carry bodycams now so we will know what happened soon and whether their actions were justified. In a complete aside I think one of the neighbours interviewed on tv was Kevin Finneys brother.

 

I heard the burglar was passing a weapon to the police, Kevin Finneys brother passed it back.

[Jimmy]

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Tributes-paid-Taser-victim/story-25760946-detail/story.html

 

 

Its a totally different story know......Very surprised......And admitted i miss-judged this.

[Bea Smith]

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Tributes-paid-Taser-victim/story-25760946-detail/story.html

 

 

Its a totally different story know......Very surprised......And admitted i miss-judged this.

 

 

Yes, once again the usual suspects can't wait to post their sanctimonious bull, and revel in the debate in gushing tones about what seems like a life lost needlessly.

 

Still, it will act as a deterrent to anyone thinking of going to visit friends this Christmas, and we must all remember that very Christian message sent across the ocean by Tone at this time of the year - 'if someone does die in the process of committing such a crime, the blame lies squarely on his shoulders, no one else's.'

[Tone]

Yes, once again the usual suspects can't wait to post their sanctimonious bull, and revel in the debate in gushing tones about what seems like a life lost needlessly.

 

Still, it will act as a deterrent to anyone thinking of going to visit friends this Christmas, and we must all remember that very Christian message sent across the ocean by Tone at this time of the year - 'if someone does die in the process of committing such a crime, the blame lies squarely on his shoulders, no one else's.'

 

So you don't like that statement? We all make choices and we live with the consequences.

 

Where do you place the blame when someone commits a crime and dies in the process?

[Bea Smith]

So you don't like that statement? We all make choices and we live with the consequences.

 

Where do you place the blame when someone commits a crime and dies in the process?

 

Depends on the crime, and the circumstances.

I have had things stolen from me, I wouldn't want someone to die for doing it, even by accident.

Some (not all, thankfully) of your police, as has been shown only too readily in the last few weeks, seem to think opening fire with a gun is fine on unarmed people who often happen to be black (surprise, surprise), then express horror as cities burn and thousands of decent US citizen protest.

 

I am glad our police are much more civilised and restrained in the number of times they use guns, and have a pretty impressive record of getting it right. There are a number of worrying incidents of inappropriate taser use though, such as this one -

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-25732417

 

Presumably if that had been in the St Louis area and the 63-year old blind man had been black as well, he'd have been buried by now.

 

The simple fact is that life is far more precious than property, without exception. However angry, and rightly so, someone feels if they have something stolen, the correct response is not to risk any life and an appropriate punishment is not the taking of life.

[Tone]

Depends on the crime, and the circumstances.

 

I disagree. I am not saying that a criminal (burglar or otherwise) SHOULD die. I am saying that, if committing the crime causes his or her death, they have only themselves to blame. They made the choice to carry out the crime.

 

However, I do agree entirely with this:

 

I have had things stolen from me, I wouldn't want someone to die for doing it, even by accident.

 

And I agree with this:

 

 

The simple fact is that life is far more precious than property, without exception. However angry, and rightly so, someone feels if they have something stolen, the correct response is not to risk any life and an appropriate punishment is not the taking of life.

 

Nevertheless, we expect police to protect us and to protect themselves in the process of going into dangerous situations. If you believed someone was about to shoot you, and you had a weapon of any sort, would you use it? Personally, I don't know what I would do. I don't like guns and would not have one in my home. But if someone broke into my house, what would I do if my life was threatened? I hope I don't have to decide.

[Bea Smith]

Depends on the crime, and the circumstances.

 

I disagree. I am not saying that a criminal (burglar or otherwise) SHOULD die. I am saying that, if committing the crime causes his or her death, they have only themselves to blame. They made the choice to carry out the crime.

 

Nevertheless, we expect police to protect us and to protect themselves in the process of going into dangerous situations. If you believed someone was about to shoot you, and you had a weapon of any sort, would you use it? Personally, I don't know what I would do. I don't like guns and would not have one in my home. But if someone broke into my house, what would I do if my life was threatened? I hope I don't have to decide.

 

If a society chooses to arm its police with excessive military style weapons and encourage their usage, then it must bear some responsibility for unnecessary and accidental deaths.

Even more so when it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that their job can be done without this happening, as in the UK.

Would you extend your argument to minor traffic offences - should a paranoid policeman shoot a driver he stops just in case the driver might be carrying a weapon. This could, in fact has, happened where you live because guns are part of that sick society, thankfully here they are not.

Your perfectly reasonable question about whether I would shoot anyone threatening me - no, because I would never have a gun. I also hope neither you or myself ever face that situation, but would look to avoid a burglar and let the authorities protect me and catch them, as I don't believe in vigilante action either.

Extending the point even more, what you say would mean that a teenager who takes an illegal drug and dies from it has only themselves to blame as they have committed an illegal act. I was thinking of something like Ecstacy where a few years ago the attitude would have been 'well, of course it is their own fault.'

Recently a number of the larger dance clubs in the north of England have actually taken proactive measures to stop this - by installing testing equipment for tablets and warning clubgoers if any bad drugs are found.

The Police have been involved in this too, and agreed that it is a good idea and it has undoubtedly saved lives. So the authorities have accepted a responsibility and saved someones children or youngsters from tragedy, even though they may have broken the law.

[Tone]

 

If a society chooses to arm its police with excessive military style weapons and encourage their usage, then it must bear some responsibility for unnecessary and accidental deaths.

Even more so when it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that their job can be done without this happening, as in the UK.

Would you extend your argument to minor traffic offences - should a paranoid policeman shoot a driver he stops just in case the driver might be carrying a weapon. This could, in fact has, happened where you live because guns are part of that sick society, thankfully here they are not.

Your perfectly reasonable question about whether I would shoot anyone threatening me - no, because I would never have a gun. I also hope neither you or myself ever face that situation, but would look to avoid a burglar and let the authorities protect me and catch them, as I don't believe in vigilante action either.

Extending the point even more, what you say would mean that a teenager who takes an illegal drug and dies from it has only themselves to blame as they have committed an illegal act. I was thinking of something like Ecstacy where a few years ago the attitude would have been 'well, of course it is their own fault.'

Recently a number of the larger dance clubs in the north of England have actually taken proactive measures to stop this - by installing testing equipment for tablets and warning clubgoers if any bad drugs are found.

The Police have been involved in this too, and agreed that it is a good idea and it has undoubtedly saved lives. So the authorities have accepted a responsibility and saved someones children or youngsters from tragedy, even though they may have broken the law.

 

And there I thought we were originally talking about an alleged burglary (since denied, I know) and the use of a taser?

 

Now we are extending this to the use of "military style weapons" (which I have seen openly in Heathrow Airport, for example). And by some perverted logic, segueing into a teenager taking drugs?

 

I am sorry you feel so much hate towards the United States and all of its citizens.

 

I stand by what I said. Someone who commits a crime (such as burglary, but perhaps an even more serious offence against a third party) cannot blame anyone but themselves for the consequences.

 

Merry Christmas.