You mean instead of shooting someone with a gun?
Of course, they should be allowed to use them when they would otherwise use a gun. Which is just what most states allow.
I don't think so.
Too many people have undiagnosed heart conditions and how do the cops know whether they have a heart problem or not.
The problem is they, the cops, don't just use them in situations where they other-wise would use a gun. They use they anytime they want and that is no good.
I think I had a mini-stroke, you and I agree on something...
I think that this question depends on whether or not the cops are protecting YOU at the moment the question is asked.
Face it, SOME people are going to say NO up until the point where it involves their own personal safety.
Cops are trained.
Are they human and do they make mistakes on occasion?
Yes. They do . . . just like anyone else BUT "civilians" really need to keep their noses out of it MOST of the time!
I know I do!
well if it were me and they were about to arrest me, i'd much rather they used a taser, as a gun could KILL YOU. that's my thoughts anyway.
Many? I've heard of a couple but is it really that common?
kind of - I just wrote a hub on a very disturbing article I read in the newspaper where police are actually tasering little old people with dementia - and , well , I was wondering if tasers should be used at all - I think they are over used really -
Well the good thing is they forget about it sooner!
Of course they can be used incorrectly. But I would not assume being old or having dementia would mean the person was not dangerous.
being old and having dementia means your weak, vulnerable and confused and most likley dont weigh any more than like 150 pounds or so , if that go read up on dementia cause it dosn't sound like your too awful educated on the subject - yer just yappin is all - anyone ever tell you that before you shoot off your mouth make sure your brains are loaded ? which , from reading your hubs it looks like your not very good at the research part anyway - sounds like you just like to cause trouble and don't know how to have a decent conversation with anyone .... the a typical concetied , fake type that thinks their opinion is the only opinion cause they are like the GOD of opinions or something , go away
I do wonder if it's the same article I read recently about an elderly lady with dementia who kept threatening the neighbors until the cops were called, and she came running out with a firearm when they showed up. In that case, she died of heart failure after being tasered. It's sad that she died, but honestly in that situation the police had every right to use deadly force and they tried everything they could not to use it, opting for a taser instead because it generally only momentarily incapacitates people. Put a healthy, middle-aged man in that same position where he's waving a gun at the police, and no one would say boo about them shooting to kill. Tasers give police an extra step, if you will, between verbal commands and deadly force...a step that I think is pretty important to have, and certainly prevents more killing by police than it causes.
dosn't sound like the one this little old lady asked a constuction worker in the middle of the day - what he was doing there that time of knight - she was obviously confused - I mean they could have told her to look at the big pig up in the tree and totally tricked her so they could get the gun - that easy - really
I think they should just use high powered rifles, that way the criminals don't do it again...
As to little old people with dementia they will never remember!!!
very funny guys - go read my hub on it - it really is a sad thing - as for rifles and guns , well police seem to use them less than the tasers - so I guess we're all better off if they just use them on the really bad guys lol
no not at all - this is a contraversial post
I don't get into trying to promote my hubs here -wouldn't do me any good money wise - I just be myself is all and I'm just havin fun - trying to share a shocker to me is all - I never heard of shooting old people with tasers before so it was a new one on me -
Then maybe you could describe the situation you find so upsetting here rather than asking for hub visits. But basically the fact something can be misused isnlt really an argument to ban it, if it was we wouldn't have cars, medications, dogs, just about anything.
o.k what-ever, I'm sharing something - but anyway - I see you have been here seven weeks so you still think that hub page traffic brings you in like.... a ton of money or something - is that your problem? what-ever - I been here quite a while and am sharing with my friends something I would like to share so - I mean really if ya got a problem with it then , like um... don't read my threads .. o.k ...
Tasers are not the problem. They are a tool, like a gun, mace or a baton. Training and discipline are the problem when the screwy stuff happens.
ya know , you got a point - but dont ya think its kida chicken shitish of a big ole cop tasering a little old lady ? Trained or un trained
Properly trained and disciplined, he would not do it unless the situation absolutely and totally warranted it.
Humans are an imperfect meat machine. There are always going to be mistakes. If we are going to ban the object used by humans in making mistakes, we will be reduced to having only cotton balls and post-it notes.
(I bet someone can screw those up too... one wrong paper cut and we're down to cotton balls alone.)
If it is the case from a few weeks ago the old lady was wielding a knife and threatening to kill herself. So it is not impossible that taser use was necessary.
Yes, and they are legal to use. The situtaion should warrent it's use
The problem is we do not live in an ideal world. Taser is a dangerous weapon and should not be aimed into your heart. Sometimes its use is just overprecaution and needless. Enough people had been killed already. Some of cases are very tragic and unnecessary and unknown. My son had been tasered once (actually 3 times in one accident) and he had water around his heart after that. And he is healthy and young. Older man cannot survive that. It's a bloodless murder. They could shot some tranquillizers instead.
And then someone would die from an allergic reaction. It is a no-win for the police except that they try not to shoot anyone with a gun. There is no reason for a cop to endanger himself or anyone else trying to talk down a crazed maniac (and no, I'm not talking about your son) rather than stopping that person from causing harm the best way they can.
People were up in arms in my area recently when a cop shot a kid hopped up on drugs that was coming at the cop with an unloaded WWII rifle with a bayonet. At about 20' away the cop killed the kid and people were incensed. Of course the cop didn't know the rifle was unloaded and from 20' he could have a bayonet in him in 1/2 second, but people didn't care.
As far as I'm concerned the life of the cop is more valuable and should be protected. A taser is designed to do just that, but everybody's body is different and reacts to the taser differently. It's just the best we have.
I agree--I have never been in law enforcement, but I have a brother-in-law and a son-in-law who are cops. You can damn well believe that I would rather they tasered someone that take a chance that they would be harmed, little ol' lady or whoever.
And speaking of the little old lady with dementia--yes, she probably was confused, weak, and feeling vulnerable...BUT she could still be a danger to others. When my mother-n-law was in the latter stages of dementia, she actually tried to attack her visiting nurse with a knife--and this is the same nurse she'd loved for months...
Bottom line--the police have to make instant decisions in these circumstances, and of course we hear about the times when their decisions turn deadly. But what about all of the times they've saved innocent lives by tasering someone who could've hurt someone if not subdued?
Not everything is black and white--there are shades of gray in every aspect of life...
I am reasonably certain that in order for a police officer to be qualified to use a taser, they must first be shot by a taser. No joke. That’s part of the training they go through.
well, maybe they should be shot like three or four times in their training to get it through their head how serious it is
This is true, at least in my part of the country...I have seen the video of my son-in-law getting tazed as part of his training in its use.
My opinion is that in order to use a taser, they have to BE SURE that suspect has a loaded gun! To taser somebody, who was just confused or did not hear or did not respond properly?!!! JUST IN CASE?!!! No they have to be trained better, much better to handle people. Taser is not a safe net in a big run. They need some alternative. Times are different now. A lot of medication prescribed by doctors might bring different crazy reactions, turn people into zombie temporarily, etc. Police should be trained to understand that too. Not just taser right and left!
Did the pellet gun look like a real gun? An old woman with a real gun can still be dangerous. In a tense situation like that, they might have mistaken it for a real gun.
How do you justify tasering a guy and killing him because he was holding a stapler?
I'm not justifying anything. I don't even know what you're talking about. I thought we were talking about an old lady with a pellet gun and now you're coming at me about a guy with a stapler? Why are you so confrontative? Have i done something to you?
Do me a favor, please don't address me in the future. Thanks.
I was not confronting you. I just happened to reply to your statement, it was for everyone on the thread. I was actually wondering how a police officer justified the use, not you personally.
Honestly, I didn't even notice who I replied to.
well, see, the lady is old and little and confused - the cops allready talked her into putting the gun down once - think they could do it again - I mean she thought it was night time in the middle of the afternoon - why could they not like say something like hey lady look at that big ocean wave in the sky and distract her or something ? I mean damn they didnt have to kill her
I don't know what the circumstances are, that's what I'm trying to find out. But it seems that you are more interested in making a point? That's fine, we don't have to talk about it.
thats it , there was a little old lady and she was tasered and she died and the medical examiner listed the cause of death as her heart being bad - anyway - it brought to light for me when I started doing research on it that alot of little old people get tasesred so I wrote a hub on it and then I thought I would ask people what they thought of tasering - any way , now I'm being accused of self promotion by some chick on here - but the original question I guess was should cops be allowed to use tasers - so we should most likley stick to that and forget the little old lady for this thread
How would the police be SURE that the person had a loaded gun? Wait to be shot?
Since I have begun in my study of Criminal Justice as my course major at college, I have really come to understand "why" police use tasers more often than publicly thought necessary. Tasers are not just used in cases of where the criminal has a gun, but they have to be used at times to subdue others when not being co-operating. It is to keep both the officer, those around and the person being tased from injury. Yes, there are rare cases of heart problems, etc. but then they should have listened, shouldn't they? Taser abuse is also rare, but exploited by the media. We live and learn and it is better than getting shot. It also helps the officer know that he doesn't have to shoot somebody and there is a bigger chance of him killing someone with a gun.
totally understood - but really , little old people with dementia - or even without should be able to be handled by big young police officers without being tasered - I mean unless they are like blowing things up with shotguns or something
Was the little old lady demented or just hopped on some crazy drug? How do you tell in a couple of seconds while she points a gun at you? It is very easy to point fingers from the safety or our armchairs, but the police being threatened with death don't have that luxury. As of now there are 3 alternatives; be shot, shoot her with a taser or gun, or try to talk her down and thereby put the police, her and any bystanders in danger. I know which one I'd take and which one I would want the police to take if it were my neighbor, little and old or not, waving a gun around my neighborhood while obviously out of her mind from something.
she wasnt really pointing it , she was waving it around
And that means she shouldn't be stopped ASAP? As in right now? Not to me it doesn't.
well, she kinda thought it was the middle of the night in the middle of the day , so , that would tell me she was confused and easily distracted , and that , maybe, just maybe she could have been distracted enough for someone to have took the gun after she set it down the first time
And maybe, just maybe she might have snatched it up and shot the policeman trying to protect her neighbors. Or missed him and shot some little kid. Or turned it on herself. You just don't know.
No, starme, the police did the proper thing (from the little information in this thread) and used the safest, most humane method he had to stop her. The relatively minute numbers of physical damage or even death as in this case do not detract from the fact that the taser is a very useful and safe tool for the police and should not be set aside.
Unfortunately, most, if not all, of the deaths I have heard about did not involve guns.
Honestly, if I'm raging about in my front yard in my nightie waving a gun at policemen for no good reason, just shoot me, okay? And not with that doubtful iffy taser gun thingie either.
About 6 years ago in my city, a young father was having some sort of a reaction to medication and he was threatening police with a knife. He was very distraught. He was not very big, around 5'6" but he ran at the police officer with the knife. The police didn't have a Taser, so he was shot. He is dead. I am sure his family wishes the police force had Tasers in that situation.
I am sure the use of Tasers has saved many peoples lives where they would otherwise have been shot. Yes there are situations where police use them incorrectly.
Of course, there are also cases where police use guns incorrectly too. In Northern BC, a young man (Ian Bush) was shot in the back of the head by a RCMP officer. I could not believe that the RCMP officer was not charged with murder. There was substantial evidence against him.
I would rather the police are given a tool that gives them an option other than shooting someone with a bullet.
by mega1 8 years ago
How do YOU feel about that? Seemed like at least VOLUNTARY to me and now they're saying he will probably serve 5 years. What kind of message does this give police in Oakland? Man, I would not want to be there right now!
by Dianna Taylor Fobbs 4 years ago
This was a static from 2014. 71% is a large number I don't care if the were 250 million people on earth. Police deaths from aggressive force is too many
by Theophanes Avery 5 years ago
Are we no longer allowed to curse in our articles on HubPages?I am going through editing old articles and it seems every time I am finished a bunch come up with the no-pay warning out of the blue. I have to go through and edit out every measly curse (which didn't bother it before) and then it comes...
by realtalk247 4 years ago
USA Today reportedFERGUSON, MO. — Attorney General Eric Holder flew to Ferguson, Mo., on Wednesday as the nation's chief law enforcement officer leading an investigation into a police shooting.He also arrived as an African-American who said he understands the racial tensions that have fueled days...
by Kate Swanson 7 years ago
Whether I agree with HP's new policies or not, I respect the site's right to set their own rules. However, I think one of the reasons Hubbers are getting upset isthey're getting warnings based on rules they don't know existExamples:1. I have "overly promotional" warnings on several...
by Asahda Shavaja Poet of the New Age 3 years ago
At what point is it ok to REMAIN in a relationship where one is addicted to porn sites. It is getting a bit much. I am not an insecure person by any means, yet I can't help to think that this can't be healthy for our long term romance. Please advise me. I have never had to deal with someone...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|