5'2", 110lbs. Can you handle him?

[jgbkab]

YouTube - The DANGER of a Handcuffed Suspect

You fool, what is the point in this? Who said that handcuffed suspects were no longer dangerous? Do you even know procedure? Or are you talking out of your ass? You ******* taser the suspect while he's handcuffed. Why are some people so foolish and ignorant?

Funny ... you still wind up tasering them huh?

Ha ha, yeah, that is funny. The funny part is procedure is to taser them after they are in restraints or if you attempt to put them in restraints and they resist. But some cops just go all executioner on your ass and just taser people for the hell of it. Hell, some of it even find it "funny." That's the sad part. It makes the good cops look bad also.

 

[KittenKoder]

You fool, what is the point in this? Who said that handcuffed suspects were no longer dangerous? Do you even know procedure? Or are you talking out of your ass? You ******* taser the suspect while he's handcuffed. Why are some people so foolish and ignorant?

Funny ... you still wind up tasering them huh?

Ha ha, yeah, that is funny. The funny part is procedure is to taser them after they are in restraints or if you attempt to put them in restraints and they resist. But some cops just go all executioner on your ass and just taser people for the hell of it. Hell, some of it even find it "funny." That's the sad part. It makes the good cops look bad also.

No, not always, if they can't get them cuffed they have no other choice, but again, the cops that are truly bad get away with murder while cops like these who are doing their job get hung by the naive public who get their information from nowhere else except the media.

 

[jgbkab]

I'm going to move on, assuming the child is, infact, dead.

Now according to Kitten and a few others, it is standard parental procedure to teach your children not to run from police. Because this day I have learned that standard procedure trumps news and media reports, we can only assume that this child, infact, did not run.

Case closed. They killed an innocent child. Kitten says so.

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

 

[jgbkab]

Funny ... you still wind up tasering them huh?

Ha ha, yeah, that is funny. The funny part is procedure is to taser them after they are in restraints or if you attempt to put them in restraints and they resist. But some cops just go all executioner on your ass and just taser people for the hell of it. Hell, some of it even find it "funny." That's the sad part. It makes the good cops look bad also.

No, not always, if they can't get them cuffed they have no other choice, but again, the cops that are truly bad get away with murder while cops like these who are doing their job get hung by the naive public who get their information from nowhere else except the media.

KK, you always put the suspect in cuffs first. As i said, if they try and the suspect resists, then you can taser them. But if they were patting down (even attempting to) a suspect and that suspect wasn't in handcuffs, they put both the suspect and themselves at risk. I'm not saying that they were bad cops, I'm just saying if they were attempting to pat down a suspect that wasn't in cuffs, they didn't follow procedure. They were asking for a bad situation.

 

[KittenKoder]

I'm going to move on, assuming the child is, infact, dead.

Now according to Kitten and a few others, it is standard parental procedure to teach your children not to run from police. Because this day I have learned that standard procedure trumps news and media reports, we can only assume that this child, infact, did not run.

Case closed. They killed an innocent child. Kitten says so.

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

 

[Sweet Willy]

I'm going to move on, assuming the child is, infact, dead.

Now according to Kitten and a few others, it is standard parental procedure to teach your children not to run from police. Because this day I have learned that standard procedure trumps news and media reports, we can only assume that this child, infact, did not run.

Case closed. They killed an innocent child. Kitten says so.

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Kitten, I know you will dodge the issue but I must ask, in the interest of keeping the honest side of the debate honest.

What crime has either of the dead people in these two threads been charged with?

Once we clear that up, we may be able to move on an address whether or not I am defending criminals.

Again, let me ask, so you don't slip away with yet another fraudulent accusation:

What crime is either dead party charged with?

 

[KittenKoder]

I'm going to move on, assuming the child is, infact, dead.

Now according to Kitten and a few others, it is standard parental procedure to teach your children not to run from police. Because this day I have learned that standard procedure trumps news and media reports, we can only assume that this child, infact, did not run.

Case closed. They killed an innocent child. Kitten says so.

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Kitten, I know you will dodge the issue but I must ask, in the interest of keeping the honest side of the debate honest.

What crime has either of the dead people in these two threads been charged with?

Once we clear that up, we may be able to move on an address whether or not I am defending criminals.

Again, let me ask, so you don't slip away with yet another fraudulent accusation:

What crime is either dead party charged with?

Why is it that whenever I answer one of your lame questions you change the topic ... back to one that I already answered? Are you so intent on being dishonest that you can't even face it when you've lost?

 

[jgbkab]

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

I didn't say that they broke the law, but they broke procedure. Look in your procedural guide and see or call one of your cop friends and ask. They will tell you the same. I said that death could have been avoided. It's not a dream, it's reality. I've been there and a cop that tells you that you are supposed to taser a suspect before trying to restrain a suspect is a liar. It's the department's responsibility to train officers properly. Do you understand the concept of police mistakes? More times than not, they end in death.

 

[Sweet Willy]

People like you suck, you support criminals, period. Rant and rave about the one life they accidentally lose every once in a while because the perp was acting like an idiot, but then you probably cheer when cops get killed. Scum like you are the reason our cities are held hostage by gang bangers, just because they're ******* kids ...

Here's an idea, move to a third world country, or better, Iraq, where there are not cops. Then come back and complain about them.

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

Once again our feline friend is making up things from her dime store cop book.

Police still use pepper spray. In fact, the courts regularly have dismissed pepper spray cases against the police. And guess who was among the plantiffs to sue? Oh my, not again! Yes, the police have sued the makers of the pepper spray. What for? For advertising it as being less harmful than it was. No one told them they would kill anyone wiht pepper spray. Imagine their surprise.

Kitten, another question I am going to hammer you with until you answer or until you dance soem more for me:

Show me where pepper spray was deemed unethical and by whom?

Show me where US law enforcement is not allowed to carry pepper spray.

 

[KittenKoder]

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

I didn't say that they broke the law, but they broke procedure. Look in your procedural guide and see or call one of your cop friends and ask. They will tell you the same. I said that death could have been avoided. It's not a dream, it's reality. I've been there and a cop that tells you that you are supposed to taser a suspect before trying to restrain a suspect is a liar. It's the department's responsibility to train officers properly. Do you understand the concept of police mistakes? More times than not, they end in death.

Really, how are they suppose to cuff the kid if they are resisting without tasering? You have not given any possible scenario better than what they did which would not have resulted in any less of a chance of his death. It wasn't a mistake, it was an accident, no more a mistake than if the kid had fallen off a bridge running from them. They weighed options as quick as possible, in a possibly dangerous situation, and acted based on what they were trained. There was less than 1% chance of the kid dying from it, they took that chance in order to subdue him without causing anyone too much harm. It's the same chance of death from any other form of subduction, they did their job and are being hung out by criminal supporters just because it was just not their lucky day.

 

[KittenKoder]

Nobody here supports criminals. I think his original position was against tasers and not the policemen and women that use them. If procedure would have been followed in both instances, death could have been avoided.

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

Once again our feline friend is making up things from her dime store cop book.

Police still use pepper spray. In fact, the courts regularly have dismissed pepper spray cases against the police. And guess who was among the plantiffs to sue? Oh my, not again! Yes, the police have sued the makers of the pepper spray. What for? For advertising it as being less harmful than it was. No one told them they would kill anyone wiht pepper spray. Imagine their surprise.

Kitten, another question I am going to hammer you with until you answer or until you dance soem more for me:

Show me where pepper spray was deemed unethical and by whom?

Show me where US law enforcement is not allowed to carry pepper spray.

The courts don't decide what they get for equipment, tax payers do.

 

[random3434]

WTF why not get this thread to 1,000 posts, just keep posting the same bullshit over and over and you may folks!

 

[Sweet Willy]

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

Once again our feline friend is making up things from her dime store cop book.

Police still use pepper spray. In fact, the courts regularly have dismissed pepper spray cases against the police. And guess who was among the plantiffs to sue? Oh my, not again! Yes, the police have sued the makers of the pepper spray. What for? For advertising it as being less harmful than it was. No one told them they would kill anyone wiht pepper spray. Imagine their surprise.

Kitten, another question I am going to hammer you with until you answer or until you dance soem more for me:

Show me where pepper spray was deemed unethical and by whom?

Show me where US law enforcement is not allowed to carry pepper spray.

The courts don't decide what they get for equipment, tax payers do.

Again, Kitten, Focus.

Did i ask you what court? I did not.

YOur answer is that the tax payers deemed pepper spray unethical?

Is that your official answer. I'll give one chance to back track, without further penalty.

 

[jgbkab]

First, procedure was not broken, based on the few "facts" offered by the media, there are many cases in which a taser is used prior to cuffing. Secondly, nothing is a sure way of avoiding death, period. There is always that chance of death, no matter what you do, there will always be a chance. The cops duty is to minimize that chance as much as they can while following procedure. However, people always try to paint the cops as the bad guys, even when they are doing what the public demanded they do, which people demanded tasers ... they spent millions of tax dollars getting these in many cities because the public demanded them since pepper spray was deemed unethical for some insane reason, and now they are whining about the tasers and demanding that they change again ... so where does the money come from? Our city is broke and cut a fortune from law enforcement funding because the tax payers didn't want to front their bill, and now they are complaining because there aren't enough cops to clear out the junkies ... seriously, you can't have it the way you dream most of the time.

I didn't say that they broke the law, but they broke procedure. Look in your procedural guide and see or call one of your cop friends and ask. They will tell you the same. I said that death could have been avoided. It's not a dream, it's reality. I've been there and a cop that tells you that you are supposed to taser a suspect before trying to restrain a suspect is a liar. It's the department's responsibility to train officers properly. Do you understand the concept of police mistakes? More times than not, they end in death.

Really, how are they suppose to cuff the kid if they are resisting without tasering? You have not given any possible scenario better than what they did which would not have resulted in any less of a chance of his death. It wasn't a mistake, it was an accident, no more a mistake than if the kid had fallen off a bridge running from them. They weighed options as quick as possible, in a possibly dangerous situation, and acted based on what they were trained. There was less than 1% chance of the kid dying from it, they took that chance in order to subdue him without causing anyone too much harm. It's the same chance of death from any other form of subduction, they did their job and are being hung out by criminal supporters just because it was just not their lucky day.

Don't call me a criminal supporter. I'd rather you call me asshole. Now, I said if they were patting down the suspect before cuffing said suspect, they broke procedure. This is a fact. Ask any cop, sheriff, highway patrolman, etc. and they will tell you the same. That is standard procedure to put the suspect in handcuffs first before you even attempt to pat them down.

 

[KittenKoder]

I didn't say that they broke the law, but they broke procedure. Look in your procedural guide and see or call one of your cop friends and ask. They will tell you the same. I said that death could have been avoided. It's not a dream, it's reality. I've been there and a cop that tells you that you are supposed to taser a suspect before trying to restrain a suspect is a liar. It's the department's responsibility to train officers properly. Do you understand the concept of police mistakes? More times than not, they end in death.

Really, how are they suppose to cuff the kid if they are resisting without tasering? You have not given any possible scenario better than what they did which would not have resulted in any less of a chance of his death. It wasn't a mistake, it was an accident, no more a mistake than if the kid had fallen off a bridge running from them. They weighed options as quick as possible, in a possibly dangerous situation, and acted based on what they were trained. There was less than 1% chance of the kid dying from it, they took that chance in order to subdue him without causing anyone too much harm. It's the same chance of death from any other form of subduction, they did their job and are being hung out by criminal supporters just because it was just not their lucky day.

Don't call me a criminal supporter. I'd rather you call me asshole. Now, I said if they were patting down the suspect before cuffing said suspect, they broke procedure. This is a fact. Ask any cop, sheriff, highway patrolman, etc. and they will tell you the same. That is standard procedure to put the suspect in handcuffs first before you even attempt to pat them down.

Again, patting down does not mean they completed the procedure, if the criminal begins to resist in the middle of it, then they are no longer subdued.

 

[Sweet Willy]

WTF why not get this thread to 1,000 posts, just keep posting the same bullshit over and over and you may folks!

What is killing me, and I've seen this before, is that few are jumping in to run kitten away. She is absolutely and obviously making an argument of thin air. Other posters have provided cites and support for their claims, kitten has been shown to be a two bit hack that just pulls crap out of the air and not only feels no compulsion to lend any credibility to what she says, but almost no one demands it.


What I'm saying is, if her little name wasn't in orange, if she was under 100 post, she would be long gone. No one tolerates this level of willful ignorance and out right fabrications on good nature alone.

 

[jgbkab]

Really, how are they suppose to cuff the kid if they are resisting without tasering? You have not given any possible scenario better than what they did which would not have resulted in any less of a chance of his death. It wasn't a mistake, it was an accident, no more a mistake than if the kid had fallen off a bridge running from them. They weighed options as quick as possible, in a possibly dangerous situation, and acted based on what they were trained. There was less than 1% chance of the kid dying from it, they took that chance in order to subdue him without causing anyone too much harm. It's the same chance of death from any other form of subduction, they did their job and are being hung out by criminal supporters just because it was just not their lucky day.

Don't call me a criminal supporter. I'd rather you call me asshole. Now, I said if they were patting down the suspect before cuffing said suspect, they broke procedure. This is a fact. Ask any cop, sheriff, highway patrolman, etc. and they will tell you the same. That is standard procedure to put the suspect in handcuffs first before you even attempt to pat them down.

Again, patting down does not mean they completed the procedure, if the criminal begins to resist in the middle of it, then they are no longer subdued.

That is why it is procedure that you put the "suspect" in handcuffs first. That is to protect all parties involved. If the suspect doesn't comply, then you force them to the ground and try, if they still don't comply, you taser them. But you should try to put them in cuffs first before you attempt anything else.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Now kitty, back to who has "deemed' pepper spray "unethical".

Please, if you will, provide us with any tidbit of information that shows that any group has affected law enforcements right or ability to carry pepper spray. Just a tid bit. Surely, SURELY there must be one example in bumfuckegypt Indiana where three cops lost the right to carry pepper spray.

 

[KittenKoder]

Don't call me a criminal supporter. I'd rather you call me asshole. Now, I said if they were patting down the suspect before cuffing said suspect, they broke procedure. This is a fact. Ask any cop, sheriff, highway patrolman, etc. and they will tell you the same. That is standard procedure to put the suspect in handcuffs first before you even attempt to pat them down.

Again, patting down does not mean they completed the procedure, if the criminal begins to resist in the middle of it, then they are no longer subdued.

That is why it is procedure that you put the "suspect" in handcuffs first. That is to protect all parties involved. If the suspect doesn't comply, then you force them to the ground and try, if they still don't comply, you taser them. But you should try to put them in cuffs first before you attempt anything else.

How often do you see them placed in cuffs before being "frisked"?

 

[jgbkab]

Again, patting down does not mean they completed the procedure, if the criminal begins to resist in the middle of it, then they are no longer subdued.

That is why it is procedure that you put the "suspect" in handcuffs first. That is to protect all parties involved. If the suspect doesn't comply, then you force them to the ground and try, if they still don't comply, you taser them. But you should try to put them in cuffs first before you attempt anything else.

How often do you see them placed in cuffs before being "frisked"?

All the time. An officer that does not do it every time with a suspect will find out soon enough why it is procedure.