Man... Just saw the video, what the hell was that officer thinking? What did he think would happen, that he'd just float to the ground after being tased? He just acted out on a guy who was obviously in a psychotic episode, don't the NYPD have psychologists? Damn, thisi is easily involuntary manslaugher if not more...at least from my poor knowledge about US laws...

Either the officer will be charged with Manslaughter eventually or he will be sued to nonexistance.

These stun guns were a good idea on paper but in reality instead of being used "Instead of a firearm" they are being used "Instead of an Arm"

Those who go through additional training and lots of time in the books making DAMN sure they know everything about this weapon are the ones that will suffer as these trigger happy *******s eventually get these weapons outlawed.

Yo're assuming the guys mother has the money to do it...

As forthe "instead of an arm" couldn't agrre more... It was exactly the same with that guy in the airport in CAnada or something, some months ago

She will have the money. Some group will give it to her and she will sue.

Hopefully, It will not come to that. This is a case on Manslaughter and needs to be handled in a criminal court.

He'll get suspended with pay. :doh:

:nope: Too bad for the guy.:nope: But he souldnt have been doing what he was.:nope:

And that gives the police the RIGHT to kill him ? :shifty:
What was wrong with simply arresting the poor guy ?
Skybird is correct in his assessment.

I feel sorry for the policeman. In Britain, policemen can kill a guy without any provocation at all and do not need to expect to pay a price

He clearly wasn't functioning with the whole of his mental abilities, by the behavior he either suffered from schizophrenia or some sort of developmental disturbance ffrom the Autism spectre ,though I'm inclined for the first... He couldn't be held responsible, he was jus a sick man... it would be like tasing an Alzheimer pacient that had been in a delirious or confusional state...

Lets look at the situation at hand. The man was good size. How many of you heros, do you think, you would need to take that man down safely?



Did you heros even notice where the mental was located? When you consider your answer to the 1st question, it's a fire escape, 10 feet off the ground, probably at most 4 feet wide. These are made of metal bars spaced at 4 inches. That is your footing.

He made threats both verbal and physically to the officers. The US EPA lists the phospher powder/mercury combination a hazardous waste if released from a broken light tube. You think there is a good chance a large and mentally unstable man, armed with an object, when broken can take on the characteristic of a straight razor, poses a real threat to cause great bodily harm or death?

I ask the folks that have never been placed into a no-win situation, what should the officers have done? Im always sickened by monday morning quarterbacks who react after the fact. Put yourselves in their shoes. :yep:

Momma knew her son was disturbed. States have provisions for court ordered mental evaulations, FREE OF CHARGE. Her "sick" son may still alive had she been a parent.

One day, there will be more brutal weapons to come besides a Tazer.

You know the problem with tasers is since they don't "harm" directly the subject we tend to consider them more socially acceptable.
I ask you, what is the difference between tasing the guy and firing on him (not with the intention of killing).
There is no difference whatsoever, just as firing on that guy would be considered absurd, so is tasing.
Calling tasers non lethal weapons makes them socially acceptable.
But the nature of those weapons doesn't change.

A gun can kill, but it can also incapacitate a suspect. Does any sensibile person dare call a gun a non lethal weapon ? :roll:

There are times a taser is warranted but those are times where it is also warranted to use a firearm.

I agree with this.
So what advantage does a taser give the police that a firearm doesn't ? :hmm:

Well for a good officer he does not have to spend the rest of his life knowing he killed a human being.

Is your real name Annie Oakley? :rotfl:

Shooting to maim is a myth. If I were to discharge my duty weapon, it's to protect my life, another officer's life or civillian's life. Don't know how it is in other countries, but case law has established in the US that using a firearm by police, constitutes deadly force. Besides, do you realize how hard it is to hit center mass from 5 feet away. I do, 90% of police involved shootings happen from 5 feet or less, and the hit percentage is a whopping 30%. (to center mass, the largest presented target)

I really wish this could be true. Sometimes to protect life, we must take life.

As I mentioned before, a no-win situation.

It is a no win situation now.

A person is dead

A person is about to be Jailed or sued to Oblivion.

Cops are ever closer to losing the taser.

You know, in some cases I don't think cops use their smarts as much as they could, or try and be creative. In this case, they probably could have gotten this guy to sit down if they waved a large Pizza from Pappa John's under his nose.

What strikes me is the absurdity of the whole situation.
If the cops haven't had the tasers and only wore firearms WOULD THEY HAVE FIRED UPON the guy to calm him down ?
I think its safe to say that the police would have done the sensible thing.
Either try to physically calm down this guy or wait for an expert to handle this situation.