If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reason Magazine)   So you punched someone at a concert, arrested an elderly woman who asked for help, then taserd a guy and killed him. Just another Miami cop doing his duty   (reason.com) divider line 29
    More: Florida, Miami, Miami New Times, HIPAA, concerts  
•       •       •

7878 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Aug 2013 at 9:22 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-17 09:56:32 AM
6 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.


The kid was spraypainting a building and he ran away. He didn't pose a risk of violence to anyone, least of all the police. Fleeing arrest might be a crime but it's completely understandable in a scared teenager. There was absolutely no reason to inflict the amount of pain involved in a tasing on him, even if it's supposedly non-lethal. The purpose of giving officers tasers is so they can stop a dangerous suspect without putting innocents at risk by firing a gun. It was never intended to give LEOs a "fark you, do what I say" weapon.

Taking the cops' side in this is bootlicking, plain and simple.
2013-08-17 04:13:43 AM
6 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: iq_in_binary: TuteTibiImperes: The Internet seems out to get this guy because he used appropriate force to stop a vandal that he caught red handed who then fled and resisted arrest.

Granted, some of the policeman's previous actions may warrant review, but in the case that's bringing this all up I don't see how he did anything wrong.

A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.

Tasers are weapons, not compliance tools. They are meant to be used as the resort before bullets are used. They are not meant for people fleeing pursuit, or those who do not pose a threat to the officers or others.

Otherwise, they don't get to use the threat of being tasered as justification for shooting. Tasers shouldn't kill, remember?


I agree they shouldn't kill, and from other articles the police did everything they could to chase this guy down before he suddenly ran at them, at which point they tasered him. Even if he hadn't run at them I think it should be justified. When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that. If the police can't use force to stop a fleeing suspect it reduces the incentive for criminals to comply with the directions from the police. To wrap it up - if the police just walked up to him and tasered him they'd be in the wrong. As soon as he ran instead of complying with their instructions they were in the right to stop him using a non-lethal tool.


Less than lethal. It is NOT non-lethal, or this kid would still be alive.

Running does not grant police officers the right to shoot someone. Running does not grant police officers to throw punches or kicks at the subject once they apprehend them. Running does not grant police officers the right to pepper spray you when they apprehend you.

If it does not grant justification for shooting someone, it does not grant you justification to taser them. Period. They do not get to enjoy a taser as a "tool." It is a gun. It looks like a gun, it operates like a gun, it's named after a farking rifle designed to kill for gods sakes, the only difference is the ammunition. It's a double edged sword. So long as they get to use the threat of getting tasered as justification for lethal force, the use of a taser is considered lethal force in and of itself. Any other way and it is simply giving them a tool to brutalize people with at will. Fark that.
2013-08-17 09:38:10 AM
4 votes:

megarian: The old lady thing gets me.

This is why people are scared of cops.


Which is just what they want. A scared public is a compliant public.
2013-08-17 03:29:46 AM
4 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: The Internet seems out to get this guy because he used appropriate force to stop a vandal that he caught red handed who then fled and resisted arrest.

Granted, some of the policeman's previous actions may warrant review, but in the case that's bringing this all up I don't see how he did anything wrong.

A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.


Tasers are weapons, not compliance tools. They are meant to be used as the resort before bullets are used. They are not meant for people fleeing pursuit, or those who do not pose a threat to the officers or others.

Otherwise, they don't get to use the threat of being tasered as justification for shooting. Tasers shouldn't kill, remember?
2013-08-17 02:25:09 AM
4 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: I don't see how anyone can hold what happened against the officer


I dunno, try hanging this guy's rèsumè on the tagger and you'd be screaming for him to head off to gay sex dungeon land for life.  Apologists don't interest me.  Justice interests me.  Call me when it also interests the cops.  I can put a badge on and blow your head off and be home by five.  If you're fine with that, I can't think of anything to say to you.
2013-08-17 09:40:59 AM
3 votes:
fark da police.
2013-08-17 09:27:03 AM
3 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: To wrap it up - if the police just walked up to him and tasered him they'd be in the wrong a

ll tell an identically worded story about how he charged at them and they had no choice.
2013-08-17 09:50:16 AM
2 votes:
The police use of Tasers are out of control.  The only way to fix this is to have central regulation where use is investigated every time like shooting a suspect.  Have those regulators not be members of the police.
2013-08-17 09:31:41 AM
2 votes:
The old lady thing gets me.

This is why people are scared of cops.
2013-08-17 08:51:51 AM
2 votes:

iq_in_binary: TuteTibiImperes: iq_in_binary: TuteTibiImperes: The Internet seems out to get this guy because he used appropriate force to stop a vandal that he caught red handed who then fled and resisted arrest.

Granted, some of the policeman's previous actions may warrant review, but in the case that's bringing this all up I don't see how he did anything wrong.

A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.

Tasers are weapons, not compliance tools. They are meant to be used as the resort before bullets are used. They are not meant for people fleeing pursuit, or those who do not pose a threat to the officers or others.

Otherwise, they don't get to use the threat of being tasered as justification for shooting. Tasers shouldn't kill, remember?


I agree they shouldn't kill, and from other articles the police did everything they could to chase this guy down before he suddenly ran at them, at which point they tasered him. Even if he hadn't run at them I think it should be justified. When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that. If the police can't use force to stop a fleeing suspect it reduces the incentive for criminals to comply with the directions from the police. To wrap it up - if the police just walked up to him and tasered him they'd be in the wrong. As soon as he ran instead of complying with their instructions they were in the right to stop him using a non-lethal tool.

Less than lethal. It is NOT non-lethal, or this kid would still be alive.

Running does not grant police officers the right to shoot someone. Running does not grant police officers to throw punches or kicks at the subject once they apprehend them. Running does not grant police officers the right to pepper spray you when they apprehend you.

If it does not grant justification for shooting someone, it does not grant you justification to taser them. Period. They do not ...


You'll never convince Tute. Anything less than complete subservience to out LEO overlords is grounds for any and all actions up to and including death.

Don't comply? Prepare to die.
2013-08-17 03:14:30 AM
2 votes:
I've seen this movie.  You go and you tell some broad who's idiot kid got his ass sent to Valhalla for being a stupid punk kid with a rattlecan, then I'll care about the armchair stoic fandango.  And I don't think you're gonna stop pestering me with it, so.. bye.
2013-08-17 01:53:06 PM
1 votes:

iq_in_binary: TuteTibiImperes: iq_in_binary: TuteTibiImperes: The Internet seems out to get this guy because he used appropriate force to stop a vandal that he caught red handed who then fled and resisted arrest.

Granted, some of the policeman's previous actions may warrant review, but in the case that's bringing this all up I don't see how he did anything wrong.

A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.

Tasers are weapons, not compliance tools. They are meant to be used as the resort before bullets are used. They are not meant for people fleeing pursuit, or those who do not pose a threat to the officers or others.

Otherwise, they don't get to use the threat of being tasered as justification for shooting. Tasers shouldn't kill, remember?


I agree they shouldn't kill, and from other articles the police did everything they could to chase this guy down before he suddenly ran at them, at which point they tasered him. Even if he hadn't run at them I think it should be justified. When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that. If the police can't use force to stop a fleeing suspect it reduces the incentive for criminals to comply with the directions from the police. To wrap it up - if the police just walked up to him and tasered him they'd be in the wrong. As soon as he ran instead of complying with their instructions they were in the right to stop him using a non-lethal tool.

Less than lethal. It is NOT non-lethal, or this kid would still be alive.

Running does not grant police officers the right to shoot someone. Running does not grant police officers to throw punches or kicks at the subject once they apprehend them. Running does not grant police officers the right to pepper spray you when they apprehend you.

If it does not grant justification for shooting someone, it does not grant you justification to taser them. Period. They do not get to enjoy a taser as a "tool." It is a gun. It looks like a gun, it operates like a gun, it's named after a farking rifle designed to kill for gods sakes, the only difference is the ammunition. It's a double edged sword. So long as they get to use the threat of getting tasered as justification for lethal force, the use of a taser is considered lethal force in and of itself. Any other way and it is simply giving them a tool to brutalize people with at will. Fark that.


Well, that's an interesting opinion, but in the case of a felony, you're just wrong.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner
2013-08-17 01:10:25 PM
1 votes:
I live in Miami Beach, and I can attest that the Miami Beach Police Department is completely out of control. Corruption and misconduct is rampant. The City shows flagrant disregard for the lives and livelihood of residents and visitors alike.  Drug use seems to be widespread and there are rumors that the police often stop and threaten tourists they believe to be carrying drugs, and steal them for themselves.

Besides this horriffic incident, we've had unjustifiable shootings, unwarranted attacks on tourists (who've been subsequently arrested for "assault on a police officer" and months or years later cleared), deaths or injuries to tourists by officers, etc.

Miami Beach is not currently a safe place, since those who are paid to serve and protect do neither.
2013-08-17 12:04:00 PM
1 votes:

andyofne: TuteTibiImperes: He doesn't have anything to be sorry for - he was used non-lethal force to stop a criminal who attempted to flee and then charged him.

Tasers aren't designed to kill, in this case it did, but the policeman didn't design or build it, he just used it in an attempt to subdue a man who should have surrendered in the first place.

Unless you think the police should let vandals they catch red handed go if they decide to run, I don't see how anyone can hold what happened against the officer.

For a weapon that isn't designed to kill they do a surprisingly good job of it.

There have been over 500 taser deaths since 2001.



Falling out of bed kills 450 every year in the USA.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/20-things-that-kill-more-people-tha n- sharks-every

/Trying not to spoil a good cop-hater thread.
2013-08-17 10:53:11 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: He doesn't have anything to be sorry for - he was used non-lethal force to stop a criminal who attempted to flee and then charged him.

Tasers aren't designed to kill, in this case it did, but the policeman didn't design or build it, he just used it in an attempt to subdue a man who should have surrendered in the first place.

Unless you think the police should let vandals they catch red handed go if they decide to run, I don't see how anyone can hold what happened against the officer.


For a weapon that isn't designed to kill they do a surprisingly good job of it.

There have been over 500 taser deaths since 2001.
2013-08-17 10:53:05 AM
1 votes:
I'm sure we could figure out whether the justice system feels that tasers are lethal weapons or not (though I'm too lazy to look for it).  Anyone have any links to what a civilian might be charged with if they tased another civilian.  Would he/she be charged with "assault with a deadly weapon"?
2013-08-17 10:46:36 AM
1 votes:
TuteTibiImperes:
Unless you think the police should let vandals they catch red handed go if they decide to run, I don't see how anyone can hold what happened against the officer.

Tasers are a very new invention in law enforcement.   What did cops do for the past couple thousand years?  A taser *is* a lethal weapon.  Slightly less lethal than a gun, but still is a lethal weapon.  It should be treated as such and used only when there is imminent threat to someone else's life, just as they would a gun.

I already know that with my heart condition, if I were to be tased, I'd be dead.  No question about it.   I try to keep on the right side of the law, but in many areas police are out of control and you always have the chance of a rogue officer on a power trip to worry about.
2013-08-17 10:36:38 AM
1 votes:

Deep Contact: Slappajo: Deathfrogg: Slappajo:
Ignoring the "running at them" (which a cop is likely to put in his report just like "strong odor of alcohol" or "was non-compliant with officer's instructions") I think the mitigating factor here is the severity or type of crime.  The person killed here posed no threat to anyone if he got away.


You forgot "there was a strong oder of marijuana" and "He was a knee-grow driving a nice car" and "I thought he might have had a gun".

I was just providing examples, not trying to provide an extensive list...One of my favorites is also "I pulled you over because you were weaving."  This one was used quite extensively by the cops in the small town that I grew up in so they could just pull anyone over at will which would then lead to the "I smell alcohol" or "I smell marijuana" or "your eyes are red" which gives probable cause to search the vehicle...yada, yada, yada...

Weaving must be more dangerous than texting while driving.
[www.art-rageous.net image 357x288]


Wouldn't that be textiling while driving?
2013-08-17 10:27:40 AM
1 votes:

Biological Ali: vudutek: Does that justify the kid being DEAD? When can Tasers finally stop being called non-lethal?

What exactly is the argument here? Batons can kill people too. The distinction between deadly and intermediate weapons isn't about what might possibly happen - it's about what can be reasonably expected to happen.


Seem to me that the Officers should be taking a little more personal responsibility for their actions, instead of hiding behind "established procedure".
2013-08-17 10:19:58 AM
1 votes:

Rand's lacy underwear: TuteTibiImperes: When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that.

You seem to think only criminals run from cops.


yeah at this point there's a 50/50 chance you're going to die no matter what you do
2013-08-17 10:19:10 AM
1 votes:

Rand's lacy underwear: TuteTibiImperes: When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that.

You seem to think only criminals run from cops.


He also seems to assume the kid was a criminal, not a suspect.
2013-08-17 10:13:38 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: When a criminal runs they accept the consequences that come from that.


You seem to think only criminals run from cops.
2013-08-17 10:13:14 AM
1 votes:

Biological Ali: Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: The kid was spraypainting a building and he ran away. He didn't pose a risk of violence to anyone, least of all the police. Fleeing arrest might be a crime but it's completely understandable in a scared teenager. There was absolutely no reason to inflict the amount of pain involved in a tasing on him, even if it's supposedly non-lethal. The purpose of giving officers tasers is so they can stop a dangerous suspect without putting innocents at risk by firing a gun. It was never intended to give LEOs a "fark you, do what I say" weapon.

Tasers, like batons and pepper spray, are considered intermediate weapons. As such, the police can justifiably use them in situations where they wouldn't necessarily be able to use deadly force - this includes preventing non-violent suspects from fleeing. Whether or not you think it's "understandable" that a teenager might flee when caught breaking the law doesn't really have much bearing on whether or not the tasing was justified.


Does that justify the kid being DEAD? When can Tasers finally stop being called non-lethal?
2013-08-17 10:04:31 AM
1 votes:

Slappajo:
Ignoring the "running at them" (which a cop is likely to put in his report just like "strong odor of alcohol" or "was non-compliant with officer's instructions") I think the mitigating factor here is the severity or type of crime.  The person killed here posed no threat to anyone if he got away.



You forgot "there was a strong oder of marijuana" and "He was a knee-grow driving a nice car" and "I thought he might have had a gun".
2013-08-17 10:03:13 AM
1 votes:
Something needs to be done about this dangerous gang. They have a presence in every part of the country, in areas where they have absolute control they feel there is nothing they can't do.
We need to stop living in fear and drive these thugs into the ocean.
2013-08-17 09:37:13 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: The Internet seems out to get this guy because he used appropriate force to stop a vandal that he caught red handed who then fled and resisted arrest.

Granted, some of the policeman's previous actions may warrant review, but in the case that's bringing this all up I don't see how he did anything wrong.

A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate, but it never would have happened if the vandal hadn't run away when he was confronted.



He shouldn't have been tapered. It's really that simple. Oh my, what oh what did we do when we didn't have Tazers way back when, when the world was still in order?

Tazers are not a God given status quo, it is a company that didn't exist 10 years ago.
2013-08-17 04:04:03 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: bunner: TuteTibiImperes: I don't see how anyone can hold what happened against the officer

I dunno, try hanging this guy's rèsumè on the tagger and you'd be screaming for him to head off to gay sex dungeon land for life.  Apologists don't interest me.  Justice interests me.  Call me when it also interests the cops.  I can put a badge on and blow your head off and be home by five.  If you're fine with that, I can't think of anything to say to you.

Granted he's been accused of wrongdoing in the past, but policemen are often wrongly accused in the course of their usual duties.  Even if the previous accusations are true, it doesn't mean that he was wrong in this case.

When someone is stopped, caught red handed by the police, and they run, anything further than happens to them is entirely on them.  If the officer were accused of excessive force, or any force against an innocent I'd be inclined to agree with you about him being strung up.  The facts seem to be however that the guy that was killed was caught in the commission of a crime, and ran, that absolves the officer of blame for any use of force needed to apprehend him.


Hey, I just fired a warning shot, it's his own damn fault he chose to jump in the path of the bullet.
2013-08-17 02:13:30 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: A taser shouldn't kill someone, in this case it did, which is unfortunate


Well, as long as he's all sorry and sh*t.
2013-08-17 01:52:41 AM
1 votes:
"The only accusation that was sustained, however"

www.entrepreneursolo.com
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report