SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. — Taser International launched a new stun gun Monday that is capable of shocking multiple times without reloading, less than a week after a Canadian inquiry into the weapons recommended against shocking people more than once.
Taser said Monday that the new X3 Taser, billed as the world's first multiple-shot electronic control device, will provide more safety to officers because they won't have to reload like they did with the older 2003 model. Officers using the weapons will be able to deliver multiple shocks in quick succession.
"Developing a multiple-shot capability makes sense to increase officer safety through the ability to recover from a missed shot or even simultaneously stop up to three separate targets," said Rick Smith, CEO of Taser International, in a news release.
So now if the officer misses his shot with the taser he won't be defenseless while the fat mess on PCP is coming toward him to attack him. Yea, seems like a great idea actually.
So now if the officer misses his shot with the taser he won't be defenseless while the fat mess on PCP is coming toward him to attack him. Yea, seems like a great idea actually.
Safety is priority....sigh.. people these days..
Good when you look at things from both sides,...
There are better ways to ensure safety of the officer. Formal classes, or better ones at that, accuracy training, etc.. I'm not expert, but anything else besides giving the officer multiple opportunities to shock a tasee. Trigger finger is out there, especially with the high and mighty, anger-management issue officers we sometimes see.
There are better ways to ensure safety of the officer. Formal classes, or better ones at that, accuracy training, etc.. I'm not expert, but anything else besides giving the officer multiple opportunities to shock a tasee. Trigger finger is out there, especially with the high and mighty, anger-management issue officers we sometimes see.
unfortunately, thats all you see. The media doesn't waste there time on 99% of the good things the police do every day. And the 99% effective rate of the taser. Its just that one bad scenario every few months that they blow up and hype which gets people talking.
unfortunately, thats all you see. The media doesn't waste there time on 99% of the good things the police do every day. And the 99% effective rate of the taser. Its just that one bad scenario every few months that they blow up and hype which gets people talking.
The good doesn't excuse the bad.
It's like saying a guy caught drinking and driving should be acquitted because he's a Vietnam vet and saved the life of a whole squadron of soldiers.
unfortunately, thats all you see. The media doesn't waste there time on 99% of the good things the police do every day. And the 99% effective rate of the taser. Its just that one bad scenario every few months that they blow up and hype which gets people talking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masao
The good doesn't excuse the bad.
It's like saying a guy caught drinking and driving should be acquitted because he's a Vietnam vet and saved the life of a whole squadron of soldiers.
This.
It only takes one example to convict any of us, i.e. drunk driving, no matter how many years of spotless driving you may have had.
But if news breaks of a cop misusing a taser and killing someone, cop apologists always come running in saying we're making a big deal out of nothing, that they should be given a break because of just how damn heroic they are.
It's like saying a guy caught drinking and driving should be acquitted because he's a Vietnam vet and saved the life of a whole squadron of soldiers.
No, it's not like that at all. No one is excusing the guys who misuse the tasers, and no one is excusing drunk drivers. But, when someone misuses the taser, it is their fault, not the taser's -- just like it is the drunk driver's fault, not the alcohol's. You aren't lobbying for reinstatement of prohibition, are you?
The truth is that tasers are a much less harmful alternative to clubs or guns. But, like any other weapon, they can be misused. They are the least of a few necessary evils.
unfortunately, thats all you see. The media doesn't waste there time on 99% of the good things the police do every day. And the 99% effective rate of the taser. Its just that one bad scenario every few months that they blow up and hype which gets people talking.
Point taken, and I'm not looking for an outright ban of them, but even a few deaths are a few too many. For a law enforcement officer to be using them, make sure they can be safe for whoever is getting tased. It sounds impossible, yes, but more protocols need to be enacted before we actually multiply it's power, per se.
Mind you, I understand your point, it's just a tad unsettling to me, even with the small amount of lunatics with badges patrolling the streets.
Point taken, and I'm not looking for an outright ban of them, but even a few deaths are a few too many. For a law enforcement officer to be using them, make sure they can be safe for whoever is getting tased. It sounds impossible, yes, but more protocols need to be enacted before we actually multiply it's power, per se.
Mind you, I understand your point, it's just a tad unsettling to me, even with the small amount of lunatics with badges patrolling the streets.
Fair enough, obviously im biased on this matter, but when it comes down to either the officers safety or some drunk idiot looking for a fight (or any confrontation the officer is with)..im going to side with the officer coming out on top. Cops dont just tase random people on the road, there is usually good reason (of course not 100%, but by a large margin, they are in the right to use it)....
And most departments would rather the cop use a taser then go hands on with someone, for obvious reasons, again, its always about the officer first, suspect is 3rd after the victim.
I don't really get all the animosity towards tasers. When they're used correctly, they are a much better option than a gun, and any misuse is the fault of the officer, not the weapon itself. I totally understand wanting them to be safer and have the cops better trained with them, but accidents or misuse will always happen.
No, it's not like that at all. No one is excusing the guys who misuse the tasers, and no one is excusing drunk drivers. But, when someone misuses the taser, it is their fault, not the taser's -- just like it is the drunk driver's fault, not the alcohol's. You aren't lobbying for reinstatement of prohibition, are you?
The truth is that tasers are a much less harmful alternative to clubs or guns. But, like any other weapon, they can be misused. They are the least of a few necessary evils.
Of course it's their fault, no one's blaming the malfunction. The problem is, you have a lot of idiots who like to use tasers in place of doing actual work? Can't subdue that 72 year old grandma? Tasered. Can't get the cuff on some psycho who's already got 2 police offers on top of him? Tasered. Can't quiet the student who's making a scene but not really a danger? Tasered. Some foreign guy looking nervous in an airport, and he's surrounded by cops? Who cares, taser him anyway and ask questions later. Oh, you can't because he's dead.
They're less harmful than guns, sure, but if a gun is drawn it's almost always necessary. A taser can be drawn at many different opportunities because it's "safer" which is a complete myth. All it takes is one shock to the wrong person and you're dead
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine24
Fair enough, obviously im biased on this matter, but when it comes down to either the officers safety or some drunk idiot looking for a fight (or any confrontation the officer is with)..im going to side with the officer coming out on top. Cops dont just tase random people on the road, there is usually good reason (of course not 100%, but by a large margin, they are in the right to use it)....
And most departments would rather the cop use a taser then go hands on with someone, for obvious reasons, again, its always about the officer first, suspect is 3rd after the victim.
What generally is the protocol for using a taser? All the above scenarios I mentioned actually happened and I can't believe that they all required a taser. Hell, a fleeing suspect, IMO, shouldn't require a taser. Especially a 14 year old girl (that happened to).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krnuckfan
Good. Nothing wrong with more idiots getting tasered.
Except, you can easily become one of these idiots due to a variety of reasons. And just because someone is being an idiot doesn't mean they deserve to potentially die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrefan2930
I don't really get all the animosity towards tasers. When they're used correctly, they are a much better option than a gun, and any misuse is the fault of the officer, not the weapon itself. I totally understand wanting them to be safer and have the cops better trained with them, but accidents or misuse will always happen.
Training really has nothing to do with the lethality of a taser.
It's like saying a guy caught drinking and driving should be acquitted because he's a Vietnam vet and saved the life of a whole squadron of soldiers.
No but the good shouldn't be punished because of the bad.
And as for the "they could get better training" argument. When it's you versus a guy with a knife, it takes a hell of a lot to not walk away cut up, or carried away in a body bag. I'm all for the taser. Assuming you don't have a heart problem, all it does it knock you down for a few minutes. And you shouldn't be stupid enough to entice the officer to use it in the first place.
__________________
Off The Scale - Tuesday 4:30-6PM EST www.wrsu.org
What generally is the protocol for using a taser? All the above scenarios I mentioned actually happened and I can't believe that they all required a taser. Hell, a fleeing suspect, IMO, shouldn't require a taser. Especially a 14 year old girl (that happened to).
Not every officer has the ability to run like LL Cool J in the SWAT movie. If you can't keep up with them and know it, and you have the option of letting him get away or tasering him, I say taser him. Shouldn't be running away in the first place.
Of course it's their fault, no one's blaming the malfunction. The problem is, you have a lot of idiots who like to use tasers in place of doing actual work? Can't subdue that 72 year old grandma? Tasered. Can't get the cuff on some psycho who's already got 2 police offers on top of him? Tasered. Can't quiet the student who's making a scene but not really a danger? Tasered. Some foreign guy looking nervous in an airport, and he's surrounded by cops? Who cares, taser him anyway and ask questions later. Oh, you can't because he's dead.
They're less harmful than guns, sure, but if a gun is drawn it's almost always necessary. A taser can be drawn at many different opportunities because it's "safer" which is a complete myth. All it takes is one shock to the wrong person and you're dead
What generally is the protocol for using a taser? All the above scenarios I mentioned actually happened and I can't believe that they all required a taser. Hell, a fleeing suspect, IMO, shouldn't require a taser. Especially a 14 year old girl (that happened to).
Except, you can easily become one of these idiots due to a variety of reasons. And just because someone is being an idiot doesn't mean they deserve to potentially die.
Training really has nothing to do with the lethality of a taser.
It always depends on the circumstances and scenario.
I know my department for the most part would not want us to tase someone for running, but it depends on certain things. Like what the person is running for, if its for having a bag of weed, then no. But if its a guy running from a house he just burglarized, then they probably wouldnt mind if that was the last resort to stop him.
Im not familiar of the 14 year old story so I cant comment on that.
Of course it's their fault, no one's blaming the malfunction. The problem is, you have a lot of idiots who like to use tasers in place of doing actual work? Can't subdue that 72 year old grandma? Tasered. Can't get the cuff on some psycho who's already got 2 police offers on top of him? Tasered. Can't quiet the student who's making a scene but not really a danger? Tasered. Some foreign guy looking nervous in an airport, and he's surrounded by cops? Who cares, taser him anyway and ask questions later. Oh, you can't because he's dead.
They're less harmful than guns, sure, but if a gun is drawn it's almost always necessary. A taser can be drawn at many different opportunities because it's "safer" which is a complete myth. All it takes is one shock to the wrong person and you're dead
So you advocate a ban on the taser because people have misused them. That is exactly what I disagree with.
I think that if someone gets killed or severely injured because of misuse of the taser, the officer should face severe consequences. Actually, he/she should face consequences even if there's no injury involved. But I'm not going to go around saying a taser is unsafe because somebody misuses it. You could kill someone with a baseball bat too if you were to misuse it, but that doesn't mean it's unsafe.
Not every officer has the ability to run like LL Cool J in the SWAT movie. If you can't keep up with them and know it, and you have the option of letting him get away or tasering him, I say taser him. Shouldn't be running away in the first place.
Then that person probably doesn't need to be out of the streets defending lives until they are in better shape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine24
It always depends on the circumstances and scenario.
I know my department for the most part would not want us to tase someone for running, but it depends on certain things. Like what the person is running for, if its for having a bag of weed, then no. But if its a guy running from a house he just burglarized, then they probably wouldnt mind if that was the last resort to stop him.
Im not familiar of the 14 year old story so I cant comment on that.
That makes sense. That, I agree with. I can even agree with tasering him as a first option if he is a danger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montag DP
So you advocate a ban on the taser because people have misused them. That is exactly what I disagree with.
I think that if someone gets killed or severely injured because of misuse of the taser, the officer should face severe consequences. Actually, he/she should face consequences even if there's no injury involved. But I'm not going to go around saying a taser is unsafe because somebody misuses it. You could kill someone with a baseball bat too if you were to misuse it, but that doesn't mean it's unsafe.
That's not what I said, at all. You can use a taser in the right situation in the right manner and still kill the person. Tasers are not as safe as police would like you to believe.
Does that mean I don't believe that have a place in law enforcement? Of course not. I just think they are drawn too unnecessarily because they are somehow deemed safer than physically subduing a suspect.
...and that just after a gathering of rocket scientists in Australia, where a drug addict was carrying a jerry can of gas got the taser treatment, and was thus engulfed in flames.
That's not what I said, at all. You can use a taser in the right situation in the right manner and still kill the person. Tasers are not as safe as police would like you to believe.
Does that mean I don't believe that have a place in law enforcement? Of course not. I just think they are drawn too unnecessarily because they are somehow deemed safer than physically subduing a suspect.
Okay, well that I can agree with. It's hard to tell where people are coming from because most people on this board seem to be against tasers altogether. Me, I think they are a good idea but discipline regarding their use needs to be better maintained.
