Home Secretary greenlights police to use new Taser 'within w

Home Secretary greenlights police to use new Taser 'within w

Author
Discussion

SystemParanoia

14,343 posts

197 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
pinchmeimdreamin said:
laugh it really is that simple.

The police should just wait for 100% proof before ever talking to anyone. idea
Yes, thats exactly what i said verbatim rolleyes

Greendubber

13,128 posts

202 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
SystemParanoia said:
Greendubber said:
SystemParanoia said:
alfie2244 said:
Very poorly handled by the officers in my opinion.
in everyone's opinion except la liga and greendubber.. in their eyes the police can do no wrong EVER
Prove where either of us have said the police can do no wrong EVER.

Dont confuse taking everything into account, including operational experience, training and offering an alternative point and explaining a topic being discussed as 'the police can do no wrong EVER'

I guess the bigger picture wont fit into your narrow minded, frankly ridiculous posts on anything police related, will it?
there isnt a bigger picture.
the man isnt a criminal
all charges brought against him have been dropped

this means the police were wrong
Priceless!!!!

Of course there is a bigger picture. Try again but this time dont use hindsight.


stitched

3,813 posts

172 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
I've been stopped by a police unit and I really took offence at the blokes manner.
Loudly demanding to know who I was and where I had come from.
Slightly nettled I responded that it was none of his damn business and continued to walk, he turned purple and began getting out of his car.
His mate stopped him and said more reasonably that there had been a serious domestic assault the perpetrator of which fitted my description, If I had ID they could get back after him.
Immediate compliance from me and we all went on our merry way.
IMO the chap tasered was completely correct until the officers explained their reason, that he fitted the description of someone wanted.
At this point there is no point in being awkward, even if you think the officers are lying, as they are justified in arresting you should you fail to provide ID.
Dislike the way the taser was deployed but it appears the bloke left them little choice but to arrest, then resisted arrest.

R1gtr

3,423 posts

153 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
Here is another video from a different angle that gives a better perspective

https://youtu.be/i7dbdZlsR3Y

Greendubber

13,128 posts

202 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
R1gtr said:
Here is another video from a different angle that gives a better perspective

https://youtu.be/i7dbdZlsR3Y
biggrin

In the faaaaaaaace!!

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
Greendubber said:
biggrin

In the faaaaaaaace!!
At least that kid has an excuse.

carinaman

21,210 posts

171 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
Murph7355 said:
Ian Geary said:
...

- if the police need the power to demand your name and ID regardless of situation, then parliament need to give them it. Until then, they don't.

...
I'd much sooner have policing by content and people be courteous and accommodating than have to legislate for everything. Creating a combative approach by bleating about rights is going to end badly.
Constable's Oath said:
"I, .. .. of .. .. do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
The Constable's Oath already mentions upholding fundamental human rights.


Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Murph7355 said:
Ian Geary said:
...

- if the police need the power to demand your name and ID regardless of situation, then parliament need to give them it. Until then, they don't.

...
I'd much sooner have policing by content and people be courteous and accommodating than have to legislate for everything. Creating a combative approach by bleating about rights is going to end badly.
Constable's Oath said:
"I, .. .. of .. .. do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
The Constable's Oath already mentions upholding fundamental human rights.
As does the Code of ethics all officers are signed up to

carinaman

21,210 posts

171 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
Was that encounter a degrading and humiliating treatment and was getting tasered in the face an unusual punishment? Article 3 of the Human Rights Act.

Murph7355

37,648 posts

255 months

Saturday 21st January 2017
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Murph7355 said:
Ian Geary said:
...

- if the police need the power to demand your name and ID regardless of situation, then parliament need to give them it. Until then, they don't.

...
I'd much sooner have policing by conSent and people be courteous and accommodating than have to legislate for everything. Creating a combative approach by bleating about rights is going to end badly.
Constable's Oath said:
"I, .. .. of .. .. do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
The Constable's Oath already mentions upholding fundamental human rights.
Indeed.

But having to get specific about whether it is in your "rights" to withhold your ID when an officer of the law asks? What I suspect will happen, if we think this is currently a "right", will be that the right will be clarified/revoked. Which is a slippery slope I really don't think we want to get onto. Especially as it can be avoided by people not being chippy, which in itself would have huge knock on benefits in society.

(Edited my own post to "consent". Perhaps "content" was Freudian smile).

pinchmeimdreamin

9,831 posts

217 months

Sunday 22nd January 2017
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Was that encounter a degrading and humiliating treatment and was getting tasered in the face an unusual punishment? Article 3 of the Human Rights Act.
I think I'd class it more as a war crime. wink

IanH755

1,848 posts

119 months

Sunday 22nd January 2017
quotequote all
Sidestepping the "right or wrong" issue, as a trained Firearms user for over 20 years I'd say the actual deployment of the Taser was terrible, with a little hop as she brought it in front of her, fairly obvious improper aiming (even with a Laser sight which works on the Safety removal) and what looks to be an unintentional trigger operation judging by the officers reactions immediately after deployment.

If I was to make a "what not to do with a Taser" video for law enforcement training this would be high up on the list of "poor deployments" I'd show.

XCP

16,875 posts

227 months

Sunday 22nd January 2017
quotequote all
Borroxs said:
Two able bodied coppers can't handle one old man that's actually only trying to leave the scene, isn't swinging a baseball bat or anything. Even his dog didn't put up a fuss FFS.

Love the way she says "youve been tasered" in her wurzel accent.
Of all the drivel posted on this thread this one actually made me laugh. What accent would you expect a Bristolian officer in Bristol to use?

techguyone

3,137 posts

141 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
IanH755 said:
Sidestepping the "right or wrong" issue, as a trained Firearms user for over 20 years I'd say the actual deployment of the Taser was terrible, with a little hop as she brought it in front of her, fairly obvious improper aiming (even with a Laser sight which works on the Safety removal) and what looks to be an unintentional trigger operation judging by the officers reactions immediately after deployment.

If I was to make a "what not to do with a Taser" video for law enforcement training this would be high up on the list of "poor deployments" I'd show.
I wouldn't disagree with that, I wonder what her higher ups & IPCC will make of it though, that video will offer a different angle than the body cam ones (fortunately) and could entirely change the outcome of an investigation.

I'll be certainly waiting with interest, I wonder if Mr Adunbi will get another load of compo..

SystemParanoia

14,343 posts

197 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
techguyone said:
I wonder if Mr Adunbi will get another load of compo..
If he does.. it means the police were completely and unequivocally in the wrong here.

They should lose their jobs at the very least if proven to be in the wrong, and hopefully criminal charges too.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
SystemParanoia said:
techguyone said:
I wonder if Mr Adunbi will get another load of compo..
If he does.. it means the police were completely and unequivocally in the wrong here.

They should lose their jobs at the very least if proven to be in the wrong, and hopefully criminal charges too.
Compensation is more complex than, unsurprisingly, you appear to understand.

For a start it's on the balance of probabilities, the cost of fighting it can outweigh a settlement, the are risk / cost balances i.e settle and pay X, or go to court with 40% chance of paying out 5X, perception-based matters i.e. would it look good to fight someone whom you've Tasered in the face even if it turns out to be legal, the opportunity cost of having the legal dept do one thing over another etc etc.

Fortunately no one like you will be making decisions like you suggest, so it's irrelevant anyway.



SystemParanoia

14,343 posts

197 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
La Liga said:
would it look good to fight someone whom you've Tasered in the face who is also the liaison between the police and the community you're trying to make closer ties with
Let me think for a minute.. the answer is on the tip of my tongue...

XCP

16,875 posts

227 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
SystemParanoia said:
La Liga said:
would it look good to fight someone whom you've Tasered in the face who is also the liaison between the police and the community you're trying to make closer ties with
Let me think for a minute.. the answer is on the tip of my tongue...
You have the wrong tense. He WAS a member of the Bristol IAG. The police and other organisations often make payouts without any admission of liability. fk off money in the vernacular. The fact that he received compo in the past should not necessarily be seen as an admission of wrongdoing. It's just cheaper.

Rovinghawk

13,300 posts

157 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
XCP said:
The police and other organisations often make payouts without any admission of liability. fk off money in the vernacular. The fact that he received compo in the past should not necessarily be seen as an admission of wrongdoing.
But wrongdoing can't be ruled out.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 23rd January 2017
quotequote all
SystemParanoia said:
Let me think for a minute.. the answer is on the tip of my tongue...
There's always a first time for everything.