Police to be armed with stun guns

[Happy Face 29]

Taze him.

[Park Life 70]

The UN and Fop vs The Usual Suspects.

 

See this is where it all goes tits up and it becomes a bit pointless.

 

So presumably the UN would subscribe to your view that the UK is 'marching ever onwards towards a police state...'?

 

The U.N. have already warned us over a number of issues inc illegal incarceration iirc. Just a thought.

[Renton 17822]

I think the UN 'use'/torture point is a bit of a red herring tbh. Police batons can certainly be used as an instrument of torture for instance-the apartheid S.A police had it down to a fine art (amongst other methods).

A baton can be used in a number of ways (from a tap or a shove through to beating someone to death).

A taser just tasers. Which is I suspect why they deem it as such.

 

Yeah I know this funnily enough-and it also makes a counter point to a degree too. A baton often has to be used several times (causing aggregated injuries) where a taser is discharged once. That's not me arguing general issue is correct either by the way, just trying to marshall both arguments. One of my main bugbears about batons is where you're seeing an officer swinging it several times before a person is effectively 'detained'.

 

Someone that requires to be beaten half to death to be stopped (form doing something dangerous, I'd assume - not stealing a packet of sweets, or something) is a good candidate for justified use of a taser.

 

However that's not an argument for general deployment of tasers, or at least if you claim it is then basically you are also claiming all police should be armed with conventional guns as well.

 

I don't follow your reasoning.

 

Because it's not an argument for general deployment (it's an argument for having tasers available - like conventional guns).

 

And because the only reason to have them on general deployment for such a purpose, would be to avoid having to call in the specialised officers....... but the same argument applies to conventional guns too.

 

But that's assuming an equivalence between guns and tasers. Which would you rather be shot by?

 

Again not the issue. Would you rather be grazed by a bullet or tasered for 2 days straight?

 

Of course it's the issue and that's a ridiculous question, unlike mine, which you dodged, as usual.

[tooner 243]

great thread by the way...........

IMO the problem is in the technology, there is evidence that the charge given by the tazer is not predetermined. Independant testing by a company in Canada (we have a had a rash of people killed or unjustly tazed in the past two years, including some poor old bastard in a hospital bed) showd that the voltage put out never followed any rhyme or reason, sometimes the shock would be within acceptable limits (manufacturers specs) and then the next five would be above the acceptable limits by as much as a factor of 10.

the CEO of the tazer manufacturer in N.A. has had to appear before a parlimentary inquest to defend his product.....CSPAN, gotta love it.

 

So for me its not really whether the police are using the technology properly or not but that they are using it at all, it is one thing to try and defuse a situation as a last resort with technology that is guaranteed to stop the protagonist from harming the public or themselves safely, but it is reckless for the powers that be to be trying the same thing with technology that is both unreliable and unsafe for the general public.

[Park Life 70]

This will follow sods law ie fat cops not wanting to chase some fit fucker will taze him down. Why is it called a tazer anyway? Should be called a shock to the base of the spine that might kill you gun.

[luckyluke 1]

I'm sure Gemmill or someone posted a link to a really funny video of someone being tazered but the search function has come up empty handed.

[ChezGiven 0]

Fop, I reckon you're a bit confused as an individual. On the one hand you rail against the power of the state and then on the other against the power of the corporation. Libertarian Socialists may exist in many different countries, doesnt mean they arent all confused about the world; they believe as an individual you should be free to act as you please just as long as you dont get together with like minded people, form a company and make money.

 

Chomsky et al love to argue that liberty and equality are not in conflict but then none of them have stepped outside of the lecture room to observe the real world and when they do and they dont like what they see (communist Russia), they call it 'fake socialism'. 'Idealist Muppets' imo just like the anarchist communists at the heart of anti-globalisation protests.

 

Are you just another Chomsky clone or have you actually read the early french anarchic philosophy on which he bases his views?

 

[manc-mag 1]

Fop, I reckon you're a bit confused as an individual. On the one hand you rail against the power of the state and then on the other against the power of the corporation. Libertarian Socialists may exist in many different countries, doesnt mean they arent all confused about the world; they believe as an individual you should be free to act as you please just as long as you dont get together with like minded people, form a company and make money.

 

Chomsky et al love to argue that liberty and equality are not in conflict but then none of them have stepped outside of the lecture room to observe the real world and when they do and they dont like what they see (communist Russia), they call it 'fake socialism'. 'Idealist Muppets' imo just like the anarchist communists at the heart of anti-globalisation protests.

 

Are you just another Chomsky clone or have you actually read the early french anarchic philosophy on which he bases his views?

 

 

Fop='Chompsky' tbh

[Park Life 70]

Fop, I reckon you're a bit confused as an individual. On the one hand you rail against the power of the state and then on the other against the power of the corporation. Libertarian Socialists may exist in many different countries, doesnt mean they arent all confused about the world; they believe as an individual you should be free to act as you please just as long as you dont get together with like minded people, form a company and make money.

 

Chomsky et al love to argue that liberty and equality are not in conflict but then none of them have stepped outside of the lecture room to observe the real world and when they do and they dont like what they see (communist Russia), they call it 'fake socialism'. 'Idealist Muppets' imo just like the anarchist communists at the heart of anti-globalisation protests.

 

Are you just another Chomsky clone or have you actually read the early french anarchic philosophy on which he bases his views?

 

 

Fop='Chompsky' tbh

[Guest alex]

Or 'Norm' to his mates

[Renton 17822]

Tbf don't we all chomp on his shit bait?

[ChezGiven 0]

Chompsky

[manc-mag 1]

Tbf don't we all chomp on his shit bait?

 

Aye but in the 'got-to-have-the-last-word-at-all-costs' stakes he is the chompion.

[ChezGiven 0]

Best nickname ever.

[Fop 1]

etc etc ad infinitum

 

Your example was , deal with it.

 

Torture is still torture if you legalise it, just like killing is still killing if you legalise it.

[Fop 1]

The UN and Fop vs The Usual Suspects.

 

See this is where it all goes tits up and it becomes a bit pointless.

 

So presumably the UN would subscribe to your view that the UK is 'marching ever onwards towards a police state...'?

 

The U.N. have already warned us over a number of issues inc illegal incarceration iirc. Just a thought.

 

Yup, I think we're on our own "cannot deport" destination list.

[Guest alex]

It's the way you tell 'em.

[Fop 1]

I think the UN 'use'/torture point is a bit of a red herring tbh. Police batons can certainly be used as an instrument of torture for instance-the apartheid S.A police had it down to a fine art (amongst other methods).

A baton can be used in a number of ways (from a tap or a shove through to beating someone to death).

A taser just tasers. Which is I suspect why they deem it as such.

 

Yeah I know this funnily enough-and it also makes a counter point to a degree too. A baton often has to be used several times (causing aggregated injuries) where a taser is discharged once. That's not me arguing general issue is correct either by the way, just trying to marshall both arguments. One of my main bugbears about batons is where you're seeing an officer swinging it several times before a person is effectively 'detained'.

 

Someone that requires to be beaten half to death to be stopped (form doing something dangerous, I'd assume - not stealing a packet of sweets, or something) is a good candidate for justified use of a taser.

 

However that's not an argument for general deployment of tasers, or at least if you claim it is then basically you are also claiming all police should be armed with conventional guns as well.

 

I don't follow your reasoning.

 

Because it's not an argument for general deployment (it's an argument for having tasers available - like conventional guns).

 

And because the only reason to have them on general deployment for such a purpose, would be to avoid having to call in the specialised officers....... but the same argument applies to conventional guns too.

 

But that's assuming an equivalence between guns and tasers. Which would you rather be shot by?

 

Again not the issue. Would you rather be grazed by a bullet or tasered for 2 days straight?

 

Of course it's the issue and that's a ridiculous question, unlike mine, which you dodged, as usual.

 

It's not the issue at all, you just want it to be, but it's not.

 

But in your line. Would you rather be grazed by a bullet or tasered for 2 days straight? And don't dodge the question. (that would be hypocritical, after all )

[Fop 1]

great thread by the way...........

IMO the problem is in the technology, there is evidence that the charge given by the tazer is not predetermined. Independant testing by a company in Canada (we have a had a rash of people killed or unjustly tazed in the past two years, including some poor old bastard in a hospital bed) showd that the voltage put out never followed any rhyme or reason, sometimes the shock would be within acceptable limits (manufacturers specs) and then the next five would be above the acceptable limits by as much as a factor of 10.

the CEO of the tazer manufacturer in N.A. has had to appear before a parlimentary inquest to defend his product.....CSPAN, gotta love it.

 

So for me its not really whether the police are using the technology properly or not but that they are using it at all, it is one thing to try and defuse a situation as a last resort with technology that is guaranteed to stop the protagonist from harming the public or themselves safely, but it is reckless for the powers that be to be trying the same thing with technology that is both unreliable and unsafe for the general public.

 

 

Aye another problem is it depend where it hits you, which is a bigger problem with dart version rather than the hand held version.

 

Although like Parky's video shows even the hand held versions can be used very dangerously (although ironically tasering someone right to the back of the neck probably isn't one of the worst places to do it).

[Fop 1]

Fop, I reckon you're a bit confused as an individual. On the one hand you rail against the power of the state and then on the other against the power of the corporation. Libertarian Socialists may exist in many different countries, doesnt mean they arent all confused about the world; they believe as an individual you should be free to act as you please just as long as you dont get together with like minded people, form a company and make money.

 

Chomsky et al love to argue that liberty and equality are not in conflict but then none of them have stepped outside of the lecture room to observe the real world and when they do and they dont like what they see (communist Russia), they call it 'fake socialism'. 'Idealist Muppets' imo just like the anarchist communists at the heart of anti-globalisation protests.

 

Are you just another Chomsky clone or have you actually read the early french anarchic philosophy on which he bases his views?

 

 

 

You just don't like that I don't fit your conformities is all, you fear what you cannot understand and you cannot control it.

 

I mean just imagine if someone made disease illegal, you'd be instantly out of a job.

[Fop 1]

It's the way you tell 'em.

 

Aye, I know. Nothing like the truth to get em riled.

[manc-mag 1]

etc etc ad infinitum

 

Your example was , deal with it.

 

Torture is still torture if you legalise it, just like killing is still killing if you legalise it.

 

 

 

Alreet Chompsky!

[Renton 17822]

Jesus wept Fop, you're embarassing yourself.

[Fop 1]

etc etc ad infinitum

 

Your example was , deal with it.

 

Torture is still torture if you legalise it, just like killing is still killing if you legalise it.

 

 

 

Alreet Chompsky!

 

Yup, plans are progressing nicely to make my death illegal and grant myself full immortality.

[Fop 1]

Jesus wept Fop, you're embarassing yourself.

 

You dodged the question!!