RSS | 
Twitter
| 
Be a fan!
Shoot 'em in the back
Shooting someone in the thigh, although trickier, is preferable, according to the manufacturer. Better still, shoot them in the back. The Chicago Police Department agreed, issuing a new training directive that tells officers to aim for the back, where the muscle mass is higher and clothing tighter.
What police ought to be told, however, is not to use the Taser unless it is the only alternative to deadly force.
We have seen too much evidence that this weapon, which fires darts that deliver a 50,000-volt shock, is used now almost routinely on not just potentially violent subjects but on people who are merely argumentative or uncooperative. The police video of the great-grandmother Tasered for disputing a traffic citation is a late and extreme example.
Rate This Story:
1 the lowest - 5 the highest
Current rating:
The Media is making it up : 10/28/2009
Taser is just helping all fend off the lawyers. The lawyers are the only ones that decide who gets to sue. Today, everybody that gets tased WANTS to sue, the lawyers place their bets for a 50% split.
"Yes, sir," "No, sir" : 10/28/2009
... will eliminate the question about where to shoot the taser.
Well, partner .... : 10/28/2009
I was taught that shooting someone in the back was downright cowardly and just plain wrong. Yes sirreee
Taser : 10/28/2009
This is a major climb down for Taser. Certainly the Taser has a place in the police arsenal. But it requires mature and intelligent operators. Only qualified officers that pass psychological and proficiency tests should be allowed to carry it. It has and will kill again. Too many doctors and too many dead people finally caught up with Taser's aggressive approach to marketing their device. I believe in proper behavior, and I am a major supporter of the police. But even the police need to take a second look at this thing and raise it up their force continuum.
Hand to hand, tasers or fire gun. : 10/28/2009
I would hope that all police officers have passed psychological testing whether their issued tasers or not. They're already carrying a more lethal weapon...a gun. With a taser as a choice, I believe officer or less likely to be involved in a fatal outcome.
Andy : 10/30/2009
I agree! If they aren't worthy of carrying a Taser, they should not be on the police force. If you don't want to have a police officer use force on you, the "yes, sir/no, sir" method should work fine.
Taser shouldn't be taken away from officers : 10/31/2009
Think about what a police officer looked like 20-25 years ago. On average a male, taller then 5’9 and weighed more then 150 lbs. A lot of those officers could handle themselves matched up against another male of the same stature. In the last 20-25 years more women have entered the law enforcement field, which is a good thing. These officers are perfectly qualified for the job; many of the female officers are much smaller in stature. When faced with certain situations an officer may draw their gun to even the playing field so to speak. I would venture to say male or female, officers don’t want to use lethal force when they don’t have too. The taser gives them an option. I’m speculating that most officers would rather subdue someone with a taser then resorting to their gun. What also needs to be taken into consideration is the number of taser assigned to officers throughout the United States, the number taser used per officers. I guessing that like firearms, most officers haven’t used their taser. The great-grandmother is probably an exception, not the rule.
