But when you look at the video where he was shot, he'd already fired the taser over his shoulder while running away, then continued to run away when shot in the back.
I would have let him go, and gotten a warrant, and picked him up later.
Perhaps the shooting would have been justified when he was getting the best of the two cops when they were fighting him on the ground, and he grabbed the taser.
But that didn't happen. It's a question of timing. At the moment of getting shot, he wasn't much of a threat.
This doesn't excuse what the POS did, or make him a "Good Boy". Those types usually end up getting killed by the sword because they live by the sword...
Taser already fired. Imminent threat no more. Chitty deal - but it's just that simple.
Yet another informed opinion.
Instead of constantly playing the know-it-all critic, why don't you put your bonafides on the line and make a meaningful contribution. That, or shut the [bleep] up.
I've never had to deal with what cops deal with, but when I was in the military I had several situations where I had to make a quick decision whether to fire my weapon at someone (once, after being hit in the melon with a rock). Anyone who thinks you can make a calm and deliberative decision whether your life is truly at risk is a much better person than I am/was. I don't give a flying fugg if the taser is properly considered a deadly weapon (and if you listen to the left, they've always said that it is a deadly weapon, before this incident), but if you're engaged and you have someone fighting you who fires ANYTHING in your direction, you have a very small window of time to decide whether you need to defend yourself.
I don't think that cop was going to shoot until he was first shot at. It's easy to know in retrospect that the guy was shooting a taser, but in the heat of the moment I suspect the cop had no certainty what had just been fired at him and certainly had no idea if the search for weapons on the guy was as thorough as it should have been. Again, I have never been a cop, but I suspect a cop who finds a guy asleep in a car isn't as exhaustive as a cop who subdues a violent suspect. So the cop reacted the way I would have...you take a shot at me with anything, I'll defend myself. The guy shouldn't have fought the cops, shouldn't have grabbed the taser, shouldn't have run and shouldn't have shot at the cop. The cop was right to assume that he was dealing with a dangerous person who needed to be stopped.
Eliminate qualified immunity and you'll eliminate cops who act like they are above the law.
The film I saw showed a flash from the end of the taser. Since I wasn't on the scene or directly involved on the scene, I can't say what the officer might have thought when he heard the pop and saw the flash. I would probably think that he had just shot at me and I'm properly trained to return fire and not wait until this guy that just got through knocking a uniformed officer to the ground turns and gives an optimum " fair " shot.
I won't ever make excuses for an obvious criminal that holds such disregard for duly authorized law enforcement. He didn't struggle until it cut through the brain fog that he WAS going to jail and he felt that handcuff
Don't resist arrest and fight and you likely won't get killed
CONNECTICUT: Legal for Law Enforcement. Legal w/ restrictions for civilians Connecticut Criminal Law Title 53 – Crimes, Title 53a – Penal Code, title 54 Criminal Procedure, Chapter 950 Section 53a-3 Definitions: (20) “Electronic defense weapon” means a weapon which by electronic impulse or current is capable of immobilizing a person temporarily, but is not capable of inflicting death or serious injury. §53-206. Carrying and sale of dangerous weapons (a) Any person who carries upon his person... electronic defense weapon, as defined in 53a-3, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument, unless such person has been granted a written permit issued and signed by the first selectman of a town, the mayor or chief of police of a city or the warden of a borough, authoring such person to carry such weapon or instrument within such city or borough, shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years or both. No permit shall be issued to any applicant who has ever been convicted of a felony. The issuing authority may request the applicant’s finger prints and full information concerning his criminal record and make an investigation concerning his criminal record and make an investigation concerning the suitability of the applicant to carry any such weapon. Refusal of fingerprinting by the applicant shall be sufficient cause to refuse issuance of a permit. Whenever any person is found guilty of a violation of this subsection, any weapon or other implement within the provisions hereof, found upon the body of such person, shall be forfeited to the municipality wherein such person was apprehended, not withstanding any failure of the judgment of conviction to expressly impose such forfeiture. Any person who has been granted a permit to carry any martial arts weapon pursuant to this section may carry such weapon anywhere within the state. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to any officer charged with the preservation of the public peace nor to any person who is found with any such weapon or implement concealed upon his person while lawfully removing his household goods or effects from one place to another, or from one residence to another, nor to any person while actually and peaceably engaged in carrying any such weapon or implement from his place of abode or business to a place or person where or by whom such weapon or implements is to be repaired, or while actually and peaceable returning to his place of abode or business with such weapon or implement after the same has been repaired. (b) any person who sells to another... electronic defense weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, shall, within twenty-four hours after the deliver of such weapon or implement to the person to whom sold, give written notice of such sale or delivery, specifying the article sold and the name and address of the person to whom sold or delivered, to the chief of police of the city, the warden of the borough or the first selectman of the town, within which such weapon or implement is sold or delivered, as the case may be.
Any person who violates any provision of this subsection shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars. SUMMARY: Section 53-206(a) prohibits the carrying of an AIR TASER on the person unless that person has obtained a dangerous weapons permit. However, there are no state-wide permits, only local permits – the permit is only good in that particular town and would be illegal elsewhere. Any one selling such a weapon must notify the chief of police with that information within 24 hours of the delivery. Therefore the AIR TASER can be sold and it can be kept in your place of business or home, but you cannot carry on your person without a permit which is only good within the limits of the city in which was issued.
Instead of constantly playing the know-it-all critic, why don't you put your bonafides on the line and make a meaningful contribution. That, or shut the [bleep] up.
I knew your mom once.
How's that?
Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
Again.. Is a taser considered a deadly weapon? Why do many states classify it as a deadly weapon and restrict possession? Why are convicted felons, like the multi convicted violent felon Brooks, prohibited from owning a deadly weapon like a taser? Why did the prosecutor refer to the taser as a deadly weapon?
Originally Posted by rockinbbar
Originally Posted by ribka
Originally Posted by Tarquin
A Taser is not a deadly weapon.
Case law? That same prosecutor said last week that a taser is considered a deadly weapon. So what is it?
That depends on the prosecutor.
If tasers are deadly weapons, then anyone using one would have to meet the same criteria for using it as they would their firearm.
Let that sink in a bit....
Tasers, batons, stun guns, bean bag rounds are all classified as "Less than lethal weapons".
Doesn't mean they can't kill someone. It just means they are used in lieu of resorting to deadly force.
Which brings up another interesting question:
If you take away all the "Less that Lethal" options from the police, then the problem is going to get worse, rather than better.
