Deaf, Disabled Senior Citizen on Bicycle Deemed Threat by Police, Tased to Death
155 replies, posted
In before someone pulls the race card.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33427738]I was seriously pissed at first, but the one thing that made me understand some was this:
So it was basically a highly inexperienced officer who acted irresponsibly in this case. Its still terrible, and he could have and should have definitely done things much different, but I won't try and say it was malicious.[/QUOTE]
Personally I say when in doubt, hold back and call for a superior.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33428238]Personally I say when in doubt, hold back and call for a superior.[/QUOTE]
"Dispatch we have a elderly black man on a bicycle, resisting arrest and unarmed"
"This is dispatch, uhh, TAKE EM DOWN"
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;33427925]He gets a report for a drunk man, he sees him take something and put it in his mouth and he's not responding to orders. What's he supposed to do, think 'gosh, maybe I'll just wait and see what happens'?
[/QUOTE]
YEAH MAN KILL ALL THE DRUNKARDS NEXT TIME HE SHOULD JUST USE A SHOTGUN TO MAKE SURE HE DIES
[QUOTE=Twistshock;33427959]That about the equivalent of saying that jumping out of a plane 10km up without a parachute won't kill you, nor will the fall, the landing however might.
The ground should be jailed, too many people die from hitting it.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't defending the guy in any way, just saying the title was a bit misleading.
[QUOTE=Nikota;33427749]Um. Falling off of a bike and hitting your head from the effects of a taser/stun gun is literally being killed by it.[/QUOTE]
I didn't see it mentioning that anywhere in the article. In fact, if anything, I inferred from the inclusion of the fact that he 'suffered from seizures' that maybe the taser triggered a bad seizure which somehow lead him to dying. Seems pointless to mention it otherwise unless it's being factored into his death.
[quote]Turner, who has been on the force for just over a month, has been placed on administrative leave.[/quote]
Now everybody read that before you try generalizing this.
Straight up murder
I dont understand the points in defence of the cop.
So OK, he was inexperienced, but he was in a car.. shouting from behind a man on a bike, who wasnt responding. Couldnt he have driven in front of the man, looked back and made gestures? Flashed his lights? Why immediately resort to some sort of weapon?
Imo, thats police brutality.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;33428445]Now everybody read that before you try generalizing this.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;33428445][B]generalizing[/B][/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;G2y8Sx4B2Sk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/video]
You guys don't realize that deaf people can't drive/ride bikes, so the officer had to assume he was ignoring him.
I think the cop shot him because he was black.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;33428504]You guys don't realize that deaf people can't drive/ride bikes, so the officer had to assume he was ignoring him.[/QUOTE]
Lets assume the guy had nothing wrong with him, and was just ignoring the cop.
That still is no reason at all to use a stun gun! He coulve driven ahead of this guy, got out his car, stood in the bikes way, put out his hand and yelled stop. Then if the guy had cycled on around him, maybe more force wouldve been necessary.
edit: I may have just got the sarcasm in your post.. but my point still stands
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;33427925]And so the angsty part of FP immediately shouts 'hurf police brutality hurf'.
He gets a report for a drunk man, he sees him take something and put it in his mouth and he's not responding to orders. What's he supposed to do, think 'gosh, maybe I'll just wait and see what happens'?
Yes, it's tragic what happened. But this is not police brutality, this is just a number of unfortunate events culminating into the unintended death of a man.[/QUOTE]
Nope, this was just yet another incident of unnecessary police violence from an organization that is obviously severely lacking in proper training and is rarely held accountable for the actions of its members.
Oh but of course the thing he put in his mouth must have been a POISONED BLOW DART and his bike probably had a ROCKET ENGINE on it so they had to stop him IMMEDIATELY or he would poison the police and then fly away scot free. Definitely a logical conclusion on the part of this officer!
[QUOTE=Harry3;33428584]Lets assume the guy had nothing wrong with him, and was just ignoring the cop.
That still is no reason at all to use a stun gun! He coulve driven ahead of this guy, got out his car, stood in the bikes way, put out his hand and yelled stop. Then if the guy had cycled on around him, maybe more force wouldve been necessary.[/QUOTE]
You cant drive past a drunk/dangerous driver. We don't know what the officer assumed was threatening.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;33428622]You cant drive past a drunk/dangerous driver. We don't know what the officer assumed was threatening.[/QUOTE]
The officer clearly made no attempt to get AHEAD of the cyclist and flash his lights. Cops need to ensure that they are both seen AND heard when stopping someone. Because someone on a bike doesn't have a rear-view mirror, simply being behind them is not enough to be noticeable.
I'm pretty dumb and I figured this out so just imagine how stupid the cop is
For the love of god, try him for unintentional manslaughter. A fuck up by the police should still be tried in court; they are not above the fucking law.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;33428622]You cant drive past a drunk/dangerous driver. We don't know what the officer assumed was threatening.[/QUOTE]
But he was on a bicycle...
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;33427925]And so the angsty part of FP immediately shouts 'hurf police brutality hurf'
He gets a report for a drunk man, he sees him take something and put it in his mouth and he's not responding to orders. What's he supposed to do, think 'gosh, maybe I'll just wait and see what happens'?
Yes, it's tragic what happened. But this is not police brutality, this is just a number of unfortunate events culminating into the unintended death of a man.[/QUOTE]
Didn't think it would be long before someone accused us of shouting lol police brutality fuck the pigs lol xD
An officer can't assume anyone is drunk based off a phone call because that could mean anything. "He looks like he might be drunk" doesn't translate into "he is drunk". There are way too many things an individual can do to appear that way, including having a disability. Since the guy was deaf as well it still can't be assumed he wasn't listening just because the officer doesn't know. It also cannot be assumed that he was pulling out some kind of weapon from his pocket (such as a knife) into his mouth based upon those previous assumptions which shouldn't have been assumed in the first place.
Ok fine so the guy has a minigun and RPG hidden up his ass. But if you're not going to be objective with any situation as a police officer, you shouldn't have chosen it as a career. I don't specifically want to blame the officer for this, but they really need to be trained better in the first place before being deployed onto the job so that they handle these kinds of situations without blowing them out of proportions and ending up as tragedies.
Yes, I do feel sorry for the officer. This is not entirely his fault.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33428639]The officer clearly made no attempt to get AHEAD of the cyclist and flash his lights. Cops need to ensure that they are both seen AND heard when stopping someone. Because someone on a bike doesn't have a rear-view mirror, simply being behind them is not enough to be noticeable.
I'm pretty dumb and I figured this out so just imagine how stupid the cop is[/QUOTE]
The article says this was at night. Flashing lights can be seen from pretty far away at night. He doesn't need to be in front.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33428700]The article says this was at night. Flashing lights can be seen from pretty far away at night. He doesn't need to be in front.[/QUOTE]
You'd be surprised at how difficult it is to get the attention of some people with disabilities.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33428700]The article says this was at night. Flashing lights can be seen from pretty far away at night. He doesn't need to be in front.[/QUOTE]
You're expecting a deaf, old man at night to have been able to see a car flashing its lights behind him? And understood that it was a police car's lights?
[QUOTE=Harry3;33428673]But he was on a bicycle...[/QUOTE]
Bicycles are part of traffic like any other vehicle permited to drive on public roads.
[editline]25th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;33428739]You're expecting a deaf, old man at night to have been able to see a car flashing its lights behind him? And understood that it was a police car's lights?[/QUOTE]
A LED police lightbar would be more than easily visible during the night, even the old Xenon ones are bright as fuck and light up half the block.
Also, as I said before, the man shouldn't be riding a bike in the first place.
I feel terrible for the officer involved that's basically ruined his whole career due to an accident, but you can't say that at any point, his actions were reasonable. In what situation was the use of a stun gun required against a person on a bicycle? Have American police forgotten that there are a hundred and one other methods of stopping someone, the first that comes to mind being overtaking them? But they didn't do that, why not? I don't know about your country, but if your officers are either too lazy to use conventional methods of doing things, or too afraid of people to submit themselves to some kinda percieved risk posed by a man on a bicycle (who was believed to be drunk), then why are you trying to rationalise their actions?
This old dood on a bike aint stoppin' when I yell at him from my car. Imma go tase him!
Seriously, what the fuck.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;33428760]Bicycles are part of traffic like any other vehicle permited to drive on public roads.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but they are significantly easier to stop than any other method of transport. It doesnt require a stun-gun.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33428700]The article says this was at night. Flashing lights can be seen from pretty far away at night. He doesn't need to be in front.[/QUOTE]
If I'm biking I'm not going to take the time to look behind me unless I really suspect something is going on since looking backwards while going forwards isn't really a good idea - especially at night where you need to really pay attention to the road in case of stones or something that could knock you off your bike.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33428946]If I'm biking I'm not going to take the time to look behind me unless I really suspect something is going on since looking backwards while going forwards isn't really a good idea - especially at night where you need to really pay attention to the road in case of stones or something that could knock you off your bike.[/QUOTE]
If the whole street around you is flashing red and blue, you're not getting suspicious something is up?
How on earth does this actually happen? Who in hells name thinks that tasering a man on a bicycle is justifiable?
[editline]25th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;33428504]You guys don't realize that deaf people can't drive/ride bikes, so the officer had to assume he was ignoring him.[/QUOTE]
Then just pull him off the bike if it's really necessary, there is no need to taser someone unless they put up a serious fight.
I think that policeman deserves 20 years of jail and death sentence at the end.
edit: You disagree with me? Oh, why did you rate OP sad then?
edit: fucking faggots you always rate me dumb for no fucking reason! gonna make alt then
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Autumn))[/highlight]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.