Off for 2 weeks but

[Island Nucklehead]

Yes I realize I blew it a little out of proportion, but we have to realize we can't have it both ways. We can't have the cops doubting their decisions if we want them to act a little more stringent. If Dziekanski had been tazered and NOT killed, most people would say it was justified...for whatever reason (police excess most likely) he died, and the police are murderers in many eyes (definitely not mine).

The police on the scene of the beheading would obviously realize that there had been a murder, but that there was no more immediate threat to any innocent people, and taking the mans life might be viewed as excessive... and quite possibly giving the perp what he wanted.

It's just a sick and disgusting episode that was probably bound to happen at some point. I wouldn't complain if the cops wasted him, but I think if we want them to act tougher on gangsters and murderous scumbags we can't have the choke chain tightened around their neck whenever they act in such a manor that we might not completely agree on.

[DonCherry4PM]

If Dziekanski had been tazered and NOT killed, most people would say it was justified...for whatever reason (police excess most likely) he died, and the police are murderers in many eyes (definitely not mine).

Personally, I am of the opinion that most people are quite leery of tazers and their use, and would only be in favour of their use if all other reasonable methods had been exhausted. In the instance with Dziekanski, I think it would be a far stretch to say that all other reasonable methods had been exhausted. That said, I do not see the police as murderers either, I just think they could exercise a little more reason and judgment (and not the Judge Dread kind) at times.

The police on the scene of the beheading would obviously realize that there had been a murder, but that there was no more immediate threat to any innocent people, and taking the mans life might be viewed as excessive... and quite possibly giving the perp what he wanted.

True, and maybe I didn't fully articulate my point so as to make it clear. Basically, what I was implying was that the police on the scene of the beheading could very reasonably and probably should have boarded the bus. If the dude would then have posed an imminent threat - refusing to drop the knife, came at police officers swinging etc.- I would be of the opinion that a tazer should have been used or a gun, depending on the threat level as judged by the officers on site.

It's just a sick and disgusting episode that was probably bound to happen at some point. I wouldn't complain if the cops wasted him, but I think if we want them to act tougher on gangsters and murderous scumbags we can't have the choke chain tightened around their neck whenever they act in such a manor that we might not completely agree on.

Agree with the first part of your point. My disagreement with the second part of your point is this. I think you can allow cops to act tougher on serious offences without necessarily giving them all sorts of leeway on less serious offences. Just because you allow a cop to shoot down a guy that has a loaded gun pointed at other people, or is threatening someone with a knife, does not necessitate allowing the same cop to beat a kid that stole from a candy shop or tazer a guy that is being uncooperative. Exaggeration I know, but point nonetheless. If the kid from the candy store pulls a gun than sure the cop then has the judgment of whether to shoot or not but until that point, he needs to use a little more discretion.

A large part of my argument surrounds the use of tazers. They have proven to be extremely dangerous and have unnecessarily killed in several, if not numerous instances. To use such an instrument in a situation that is not life and death puts members of the public at risk unnecessarily and is an exercise of bad judgment. Yes, officers need the authority and leeway to exercise judgment in difficult situations but that does not mean they should gamble with people's lives.

[Island Nucklehead]

A large part of my argument surrounds the use of tazers. They have proven to be extremely dangerous and have unnecessarily killed in several, if not numerous instances. To use such an instrument in a situation that is not life and death puts members of the public at risk unnecessarily and is an exercise of bad judgment. Yes, officers need the authority and leeway to exercise judgment in difficult situations but that does not mean they should gamble with people's lives.

Yeah I see where you're coming from, but I don't believe the individual officers are to blame for deploying (supposedly) less than lethal weapons which they have been authorized to use. If the police board approves these weapons, then we can't blame cops for using them. I think there needs to be more testing, and they should probably be scrapped in the interim due to the dangers, but the blame should rest with the people in charge, not those following guidelines.

Personally, I don't like the way police are villified in this province. I think they have an extremely difficult job, and given the fact this guy was uncooperative and combative, if I had the option to tazer him or risk getting punched, kicked, bitten or stapled I'd probably do the same thing. I don't see any reason for police officers to risk getting punched in the mouth. It's a shame the man died, but his death needs to be laid at the feet of those that approved (and marketed) tazers as non-lethal weapons.

As far as all the gangsterism you guys are having over there on the mainland. It's sickening that the police know who every one of these people are, but must cross every T and dot every I or risk charges being dismissed on technicalities. I was once seriously considering law enforcement, but after seeing all the hoops the good guys have to jump through, only to arrest the same crack head every 3 days and face public outcries every time they rough him up a little... it's just not worth it.

[dr.dork]

Personally, I am of the opinion that most people are quite leery of tazers and their use, and would only be in favour of their use if all other reasonable methods had been exhausted. In the instance with Dziekanski, I think it would be a far stretch to say that all other reasonable methods had been exhausted. That said, I do not see the police as murderers either, I just think they could exercise a little more reason and judgment (and not the Judge Dread kind) at times.

There couldn't be something at such polar extremes as the bus incident and the airport incident. We're talking about one case of a confirmed murdered. If they popped him nobody would have said boo.

In the airport incident we have 4 policeman against one (confirmed) unarmed man. He was in a SECURE area of the airport. He was known to NOT have a gun, knife, frozen fish, darts, or nail clippers. He was tasered 5 times, 4 while writhing on the ground. Furthermore the police all fabricated and colluded on their stories. The police were afraid that he was going to harm them with a stapler ? He did not touch one of these so-called protectors of the peace. Give me a break.

Being in a SECURE area of the airport goes both ways. It means you are not armed and dangerous. It means you should also be SECURE. I can't believe the police were not charged in this incident. It was 100% preventable.

[DonCherry4PM]

Yeah I see where you're coming from, but I don't believe the individual officers are to blame for deploying (supposedly) less than lethal weapons which they have been authorized to use. If the police board approves these weapons, then we can't blame cops for using them. I think there needs to be more testing, and they should probably be scrapped in the interim due to the dangers, but the blame should rest with the people in charge, not those following guidelines.

Good point. Still, when you know that there is a fairly high chance of killing someone (much more than say a tackle, or the use of a dog) I think some of the responsibility must lie at your own feet. The police are not androids. Their job requires that they must exhibit judgment. Sure more blame should probably be directed towards those who have okayed the use of tazers in the first place, but I would still submit that the police have a duty in their position to show restraint.

Personally, I don't like the way police are villified in this province. I think they have an extremely difficult job, and given the fact this guy was uncooperative and combative, if I had the option to tazer him or risk getting punched, kicked, bitten or stapled I'd probably do the same thing. I don't see any reason for police officers to risk getting punched in the mouth. It's a shame the man died, but his death needs to be laid at the feet of those that approved (and marketed) tazers as non-lethal weapons.

Again, good point. Why should the Police be placed in a position in which they must endanger themselves to avoid hurting someone that is committing a crime? On the surface this would seem to be an obvious answer of, they shouldn't. This is definitely where the material gets a little more grey. I would submit that it is part of their chosen career to put themselves in risky situations where they may get hurt. Certainly there is a line, and with the prevalence of such diseases as AIDS, etc. the line becomes all the more blurred. Still, pepper spray, a knightstick (is that what its still called?), a dog, etc., would, to me, be viable options that should be undertaken before the use of a life-threatening device.

As far as all the gangsterism you guys are having over there on the mainland. It's sickening that the police know who every one of these people are, but must cross every T and dot every I or risk charges being dismissed on technicalities. I was once seriously considering law enforcement, but after seeing all the hoops the good guys have to jump through, only to arrest the same crack head every 3 days and face public outcries every time they rough him up a little... it's just not worth it.

Yeah, the gangsterism over here in Edmonton is becoming quite the problem as well. And, yes, the hoops are arduous but in most cases are necessarily preventative of government and its underlings from subtly but tyrannically suppressing the freedoms and rights of individuals. Regrettable at times, but, in my opinion, a necessary evil.

[Island Nucklehead]

Yeah there's no doubt in my mind pepper spray would have gone a long way with less damage.

I know what these cops were experiencing though. When we were in a scrap overseas, we'd go for the biggest fanciest stuff we could. Why blow up that building with a 250lbs bomb when we could use the 1000-pounder? A lot of that is human nature, and I think you're completely correct to argue that tazers need to be rethought or removed, perhaps re-classified into the position of "potentially lethal" weapon...ie: Don't use this unless you're willing to kill but don't want/need immediate lethal force.

[dr.dork]

Yeah there's no doubt in my mind pepper spray would have gone a long way with less damage.

I know what these cops were experiencing though. When we were in a scrap overseas, we'd go for the biggest fanciest stuff we could. Why blow up that building with a 250lbs bomb when we could use the 1000-pounder? A lot of that is human nature, and I think you're completely correct to argue that tazers need to be rethought or removed, perhaps re-classified into the position of "potentially lethal" weapon...ie: Don't use this unless you're willing to kill but don't want/need immediate lethal force.

I don't have any problem with police having guns or tasers. And if they go slightly over the line sometimes, fine.

But tasering somebody 5 times while said person was in a secure area surrounded by 4 police is a bit much. Then they cover their asses by blatantly lying about their conduct AND try to sweep the evidence under the rug. The police were busted, plain and simple. They killed someone for no reason. I am sure most police are not as bad as these 4 clowns, but of course all the rest of them protect their own. Shameful, really.

[Blob Mckenzie]

So this prick is out walking the streets now. Awesome , only in Canada.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Yeah if he can't be locked up , deport the asshole.

[Topper]

hey Bubbles, ask him how your ass tastes.