Canadian Mounties taser 82 year old in hospital bed while connected to oxygen.

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JD50
'll be interested to see what you can come up with because honestly I have no idea how many cops have died from being tased. Here's your chance to prove your point.

Still waiting.

I am not sure why you are quoting yourself nor realize I really don't care to prove anything. It's an exercise in futility. I can scourge up a ton of stuff, put some time in, but your type can't comprehend it.

Much like your reaction to the 'don't talk to cops' video. You admit you don't need to watch it because you can tell by the others reactions.

You are a victim of hearsay.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: alkemyst


I am not sure why you are quoting yourself nor realize I really don't care to prove anything. It's an exercise in futility. I can scourge up a ton of stuff, put some time in, but your type can't comprehend it.

So you're just trolling then? Thanks for clearing that up.

Much like your reaction to the 'don't talk to cops' video. You admit you don't need to watch it because you can tell by the others reactions.

You are a victim of hearsay.

I said I'm not going to watch that video because it's already pretty obvious when you should and shouldn't talk to a cop. If you're accused of a crime your best bet is to not say a word until you talk to a lawyer. Similarly, If someone posted a video titled "Here's why you should say no to drugs!!" I wouldn't watch that either, since it's pretty obvious why you should say no to drugs. Can you understand that?

Do you need to watch a video posted on an internet forum on why you shouldn't shoot yourself in the face, or are you pretty content with just knowing through common sense and "hearsay" that you shouldn't shoot yourself in the face?

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JD50

I said I'm not going to watch that video because it's already common sense. If you're accused of a crime your best bet is to not say a word until you talk to a lawyer. Similarly, If someone posted a video titled "Here's why you should say no to drugs!!" I wouldn't watch that either, since it's pretty obvious why you should say no to drugs. Can you understand that?

how do you know if the video is really common sense or not though?

I can say I don't need to watch a certain video because I know about the topic already, but I can't say I don't need to watch a certain video because I know what it's about already. Unless of course I was Karnac the Great.

My money is you have just heard some things your cop and security buddies talk about and now think it's the way it all works.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: JD50

I said I'm not going to watch that video because it's already common sense. If you're accused of a crime your best bet is to not say a word until you talk to a lawyer. Similarly, If someone posted a video titled "Here's why you should say no to drugs!!" I wouldn't watch that either, since it's pretty obvious why you should say no to drugs. Can you understand that?

how do you know if the video is really common sense or not though?

I can say I don't need to watch a certain video because I know about the topic already, but I can't say I don't need to watch a certain video because I know what it's about already. Unless of course I was Karnac the Great.

My money is you have just heard some things your cop and security buddies talk about and now think it's the way it all works.

Or I can just use my ~3 year law enforcement experience and common sense instead. If you have an issue with me not watching this video then post in that thread instead of trying to deflect your inability to come up with any proof whatsoever that tasers are more dangerous than an ASP, pepper spray, and hand to hand fighting.

 

[Dessert Tears]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Flatscan

Originally posted by: alkemyst, numbered labels inserted
(1) The main debate is while many people can take a blast or more from a taser, a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed. (2) The second half of this is the police are not using due diligience to use the weapon but rather just deploying it's force thinking it's harmless.

(2a) A taser should only be used in situations were other methods were exhausted and the level of force needed is equivalent to when one would use their nightstick/baton, but prior to having to shoot to kill.

(2b) Too many cops are freaking slobs today though and cannot defend themselves much at all without weapons.

1) Would you elaborate on "a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed"? Feel free to provide any or all of the following:

• Quantification of "a decent amount of the population"
• Potential risk factors
• Links to sources

2a) Use-of-force continuums (continua) vary by department, but Tasers are often considered to be equivalent to pepper spray, below batons. Do you believe that individual officers often violate/bend policy, or that the policy needs revision?

You hear the news right? You read this very thread right?

That's a decent enough population for me.

I am not sure what you are looking for with your geek-like 2a above. Cops are using their tasers almost from the get go at times with people that are non-threatening.

I think you are DELUSIONAL if you are thinking it's absurd that officers violate or bend any policies.

There are about 15 on leave right now that can easily be read about via CNN doing just this. In my hometown we have 7 right now that have milked about $400k in overtime that was never worked in the last TWO years.

1) Do you understand that the evidence provided in this thread supporting your stated beliefs is anecdotal and substantially weak?

2a) My mistake, I brought in parts of (2). Restatement: your statement in (2a, re: when Taser use is appropriate) does not reflect official policy in many departments. Am I correct in understanding that you disagree with that policy?

Originally posted by: alkemyst
I am not sure why you are quoting yourself nor realize I really don't care to prove anything. It's an exercise in futility. I can scourge up a ton of stuff, put some time in, but your type can't comprehend it.

I assume that this applies to me also. I would welcome your doing and presenting research, as I may learn new information.

 

[illusion88]

Seems like the cop should be able to control the situtation without the use of a tazor. If a cop can't disarm an 82 year old man who is connected to O2 AND laying down with his bare hands, he probably shouldn't be wearing the badge.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JD50
Or I can just use my ~3 year law enforcement experience and common sense instead. If you have an issue with me not watching this video then post in that thread instead of trying to deflect your inability to come up with any proof whatsoever that tasers are more dangerous than an ASP, pepper spray, and hand to hand fighting.

where did I include the bolded? Where did I say the others weren't dangerous?

My stand is tasers are being used too quickly and non-prudently causing loss of lives. The way these accidents are spun is just like you try to do..."yeah we tased him on the railroad tracks and he fell, but it was the oncoming train that killed him...at least we are going with that."

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Flatscan

Originally posted by: alkemyst
I am not sure why you are quoting yourself nor realize I really don't care to prove anything. It's an exercise in futility. I can scourge up a ton of stuff, put some time in, but your type can't comprehend it.

I assume that this applies to me also. I would welcome your doing and presenting research, as I may learn new information.

Learn to use what you have already...

1 I
1a think
1a.i are
2 already
2a overloaded.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: illusion88
Seems like the cop should be able to control the situtation without the use of a tazor. If a cop can't disarm an 82 year old man who is connected to O2 AND laying down with his bare hands, he probably shouldn't be wearing the badge.

You want to go hands-on with a guy holding a knife?

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: illusion88
Seems like the cop should be able to control the situtation without the use of a tazor. If a cop can't disarm an 82 year old man who is connected to O2 AND laying down with his bare hands, he probably shouldn't be wearing the badge.

You want to go hands-on with a guy holding a knife?

an 82 year old man, and a pocket knife. Cops today are worthless other than revenue generation.


OH NOES I MAY GET HURT ON THE JOB A LITTLE.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: illusion88
Seems like the cop should be able to control the situtation without the use of a tazor. If a cop can't disarm an 82 year old man who is connected to O2 AND laying down with his bare hands, he probably shouldn't be wearing the badge.

You want to go hands-on with a guy holding a knife?

an 82 year old man, and a pocket knife. Cops today are worthless other than revenue generation.

OH NOES I MAY GET HURT ON THE JOB A LITTLE.

You, sir, are a moron.

 

[OutHouse]

the tazer did exactly what it was suppose to do. diffuse a dangerous situation where nobody gets hurt. whats the problem with that?

 

[skace]

I guess the argument is whether an 82 year old half dead man wielding a pocket knife is actually considered a dangerous situation for 3 trained police officers.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: skace
I guess the argument is whether an 82 year old half dead man wielding a pocket knife is actually considered a dangerous situation for 3 trained police officers.

or have 3 cops wrestle a 82 old man to get it away from him with out the pocket knife sinking into one of the officers eye.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Citrix
or have 3 cops wrestle a 82 old man to get it away from him with out the pocket knife sinking into one of the officers eye.

Is that how they used to disarm the elderly back in the days? With their eyes? Sounds like a pretty poor strategy, send ol 1 eye back to training.

 

[alkemyst]

i don't know, but I have defended off some crazy mom swinging a 2x4 she hammered nails through. Got hit a couple times, I lived just fine. If I wanted to I could have killed her and been in the right (she had me cornered).

Like I said cops today are in it for an easy paycheck, they just want to generate revenue and get paid...milk the system and then retire in 20 years at 75% in most places for life + medical/dental.

 

[JD50]

Edit - NM, it's not even worth responding to people that already know everything.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JD50
Or I can just use my ~3 year law enforcement experience and common sense instead. If you have an issue with me not watching this video then post in that thread instead of trying to deflect your inability to come up with any proof whatsoever that tasers are more dangerous than an ASP, pepper spray, and hand to hand fighting.

Originally posted by: alkemyst

where did I include the bolded? Where did I say the others weren't dangerous?

My stand is tasers are being used too quickly and non-prudently causing loss of lives. The way these accidents are spun is just like you try to do..."yeah we tased him on the railroad tracks and he fell, but it was the oncoming train that killed him...at least we are going with that."

Originally posted by: JD50
Holy sh1t you can't be this stupid.

Originally posted by: alkemyst

The main debate is while many people can take a blast or more from a taser, a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed. The second half of this is the police are not using due diligience to use the weapon but rather just deploying it's force thinking it's harmless.

A taser should only be used in situations were other methods were exhausted and the level of force needed is equivalent to when one would use their nightstick/baton, but prior to having to shoot to kill.

Too many cops are freaking slobs today though and cannot defend themselves much at all without weapons.

Originally posted by: JD50
I was simply pointing out that in that particular case, YOUR solution of using other methods (like a nightstick/baton) instead of a taser because " a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed" (which you STILL have yet to show any proof whatsoever) could have just as easily made someone fall and break their spine.

I've had a lot of patience with you and tried to be somewhat civil even though you insist on constantly insulting everyone you disagree with. If you can't even remember that you DID bring up the use of an ASP/nightstick/baton, then I don't really see the point of continuing this conversation. And as evidence by your last ignorant post about Cops just being in it for the retirement, you seem to have it all figured out, so I guess we're done here.

Apparently Alkemyst knows everything...;

First, I think you have some kind of comprehension problem. I said tasers should be used when the equivalent of the force from a baton is needed, not when greater. The taser was to replace the baton, not be a much sooner show of force.

However, cowardly cops are using them quickly and without regard for the situation.

There are some great cops out there, but not many.

 

[illusion88]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: illusion88
Seems like the cop should be able to control the situtation without the use of a tazor. If a cop can't disarm an 82 year old man who is connected to O2 AND laying down with his bare hands, he probably shouldn't be wearing the badge.

You want to go hands-on with a guy holding a knife?

an 82 year old man, and a pocket knife. Cops today are worthless other than revenue generation.

OH NOES I MAY GET HURT ON THE JOB A LITTLE.

You, sir, are a moron.

Three cops should have no problem taking a knife from an 82 year old man who is laying down without using a tazor (or any other weapon for that matter). One confused, weak, old man should pose no serious threat to three officers.

Look, I am all about personal safety. I am an EMT and have worked closely with police officers in dangerous situations. This was not one of them. The officers had every right and precedence to use a tazor on this individual, but proper judgment and an unarmed disarm should have been the method chosen.

There is no reason the police officers should have felt endangered in this situation.

 

[james1701]

Originally posted by: purepolly

They guys was laying in bed at some point. And he was conected to the wall with O2, and IV's. All they had to do was wait him out. He was not going anywhere, if he tried, he would have fallen from being conected to everything.


LOL get a clue... the 6 feet of plastic IV tubing connected to a pump or an O2 line connected to a wall will not in any way restrain a pt. Both are very easy to pull out.

You didn't read the article very carefully. Keywords you should have picked up on "former prison guard" "delusional" "suffering from pneumonia following heart bypass surgery."

I care for geriatric veterans in an acute care setting daily. Don't underestimate how dangerous this work setting can be. The top three areas for violence in hospital settings are the ER, psyche and geriatric floors.

And you sir are not thinking.
suffering from pneumonia following heart bypass surgery, "sometimes becomes delusional when he can't breathe properly"

I am a Respiratory Therapist at a tri divisional 1300 bed hospital. When someone is hypoxic, I know exactly what 6 feet of plastic IV tubing conected to a pump and a pole and O2 tubing will due. At 82, with staples down his chest from the heart surgery, and by the way, if he would lift more than 20 pounds, he would cracked his sternum back open, and being short of breath, he would have stubled and fallen, or he might have sat back down.

Yes the three places you mentioned are high probability areas for violence, but he was not in those places. He was either in an open heart recovery floor or a pulmonary floor. I dont know how their staffing is, but more than likely, there was a lazy orderly watching the floor and did not want to deal with him, or a new and inexperienced nurse that did not know better.

 

[jlee]

The taser was to replace the baton, not be a much sooner show of force.

You're wrong again, but that's no surprise.

I find it amazing how so many people think they're qualified to judge what an officer should or shouldn't do, but these same people don't walk in on their plumber and tell him how to run pipe..

 

[Perknose]

I heard he had a knife and a fork, and looked dangerously hungry.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: JLee

The taser was to replace the baton, not be a much sooner show of force.

You're wrong again, but that's no surprise.

I find it amazing how so many people think they're qualified to judge what an officer should or shouldn't do, but these same people don't walk in on their plumber and tell him how to run pipe..

what was the taser created for? To get you to the donut shop faster. I can see though why you are so worried about hand to hand....what do you weigh in at like 150 or so?

Also I'd be doing my own plumbing, much like I am doing my own a/c in my car this weekend.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: james1701

Yes the three places you mentioned are high probability areas for violence, but he was not in those places. He was either in an open heart recovery floor or a pulmonary floor. I dont know how their staffing is, but more than likely, there was a lazy orderly watching the floor and did not want to deal with him, or a new and inexperienced nurse that did not know better.

I figured it was a Canadian thing calling the police for a hospital incident. Here we have far more dangerous patients at times and it's handled by the staff.

It's obvious this guy was 'sick' and not just being a criminal.

I am thinking the guys like JLee and JD50 would have liked to just cap him because officer safety is the first priority.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: JLee

The taser was to replace the baton, not be a much sooner show of force.

You're wrong again, but that's no surprise.

I find it amazing how so many people think they're qualified to judge what an officer should or shouldn't do, but these same people don't walk in on their plumber and tell him how to run pipe..

what was the taser created for? To get you to the donut shop faster. I can see though why you are so worried about hand to hand....what do you weigh in at like 150 or so?

Also I'd be doing my own plumbing, much like I am doing my own a/c in my car this weekend.

The Taser was designed to provide another tool for law enforcement. It was not designed to "replace" everything else. In some instances, it can be an alternative to deadly force. In other instances, it can be an alternative to OC or a baton.

Incidentally, the Taser is lower on the force continuum than the baton is. So, the Taser was not designed to 'replace' the baton, and it is a lower level of force than the baton, and as such would, in most cases, be deployed prior to the baton.

Originally posted by: alkemyst
I figured it was a Canadian thing calling the police for a hospital incident. Here we have far more dangerous patients at times and it's handled by the staff.

It's obvious this guy was 'sick' and not just being a criminal.

I am thinking the guys like JLee and JD50 would have liked to just cap him because officer safety is the first priority.

Nobody's saying he was being a criminal. However, nothing says you have to be a criminal in order to have force used against you. Ever hear of involuntary admissions?

And no, I wouldn't shoot him. Wrong again.