17 year old Phillies fan runs on field, tasered by security (story and pics)

[Correction]

My face is covered with Kuya's semen and I want the world to know bout it

cool story, bro. Nobody is taking him as seriously as you think they are.

http://i40.tinypic.com/rhn4w1.jpg

[Drex]

You ever make a taser out of a disposable camera? Fuck yeah.

[Moss]

You seem to think that the chance of death is sufficiently small to justify its use, and that thus whether it's a dangerous situation does not matter. This, is a value judgement, much like mine is. You think the chance of death is not enough to deter use in non dangerous situations, and i do. What number of deaths is enough? There is no objective measure, sans intuition, which does not require that i say is not objective.

You either think that the chance of death should limit its use to certain situations or you don't. There's no room for debate here.

This is pretty much correct, but I am not saying that tasers should be used in any situation. Obviously it has a place(in my opinion) in subduing those resisting in dangerous situations. A person rushing the field during a sporting event is kind of a gray area. It is usually just a harmless annoyance. However, it is better to take extra caution on the chance that the person(who is already breaking the law by going onto the field and then resisting arrest) has a malicious intent.

[Anoat]

I just wanted funny photoshop pics and you guys made a whole discussion. Guess its back to the random pic thread for laughs!

[Acturus]

You seem to know what that fat guy is thinking. To you (how you know this i don't know) the guy tased him because he felt he needed to control the situation (or what?) rather than he was just tired of chasing the guy around and it would be easier to tase him.

But this little discussion up here is irrelevant. What the guy was thinking does not matter. The point is the situation did not demonstrate any reasonable impression of danger, and a taser, with a documented chance of death, was used in a situation that seem to pose no inmediate danger. You seem to think that the chance of death is sufficiently small to justify its use, and that thus whether it's a dangerous situation does not matter. This, is a value judgement, much like mine is. You think the chance of death is not enough to deter use in non dangerous situations, and i do. What number of deaths is enough? There is no objective measure, sans intuition, which does not require that i say is not objective.

You either think that the chance of death should limit its use to certain situations or you don't. There's no room for debate here.

In the last however many pages of discussion, were the parameters of acceptable taser use as per the rules of the Philidelphia police ever listed?

Because if they weren't, then it seems to me that you, Kuya, are the one incorrectly assuming that you know the situation. Whether or not a taser has "a chance of death" is irrelevent if the taser is an acceptable tool in subduing an offender.

Common sense dictates that the taser falls somewhere in between handcuffs and a firearm as a useful tool in law enforcement, and this "chance of death" would also be an irrelevent factor in determining whether or not the arm-chair commentators of this forum can reasonably decide what Officer Pal was thinking.

tl;dr: hippo crisps

[archibaldcrane]

The kid didn't "deserve" a good tasing, but the officer made a quick decision that it was necessary to control the situation.

I love how the first time a fan who runs out on the field in the history of American professional sports is tased, for some reason in that situation out of the thousands and thousands of times it has happened before, this time a taser is necessary.

Obviously this kid was exceptional, possibly with mutant powers, and conventional means for arresting him wouldn't have worked.

ONLY THROUGH TASER WILL JUSTICE BE SERVED!

Thank god tasers were invented - they would've never gotten this dastardly criminal otherwise, considering that a taser was necessary for his apprehension, despite a taser never being necessary before in any American pro sports "fan on the field" situation ever before.

[Tyche]

Just out of curiosity archi, why do you care?

[Kuya]

In the last however many pages of discussion, were the parameters of acceptable taser use as per the rules of the Philidelphia police ever listed?

Because if they weren't, then it seems to me that you, Kuya, are the one incorrectly assuming that you know the situation. Whether or not a taser has "a chance of death" is irrelevent if the taser is an acceptable tool in subduing an offender.

Common sense dictates that the taser falls somewhere in between handcuffs and a firearm as a useful tool in law enforcement, and this "chance of death" would also be an irrelevent factor in determining whether or not the arm-chair commentators of this forum can reasonably decide what Officer Pal was thinking.

tl;dr: hippo crisps

I already mentioned that what the officer is thinking does not matter, because that was not my point, and what the law says is also irrelevant because the point is that tasers should not be used in situations where no inmediate danger exists. Meaning, the rules need to be more strict, meaning, the rules should change, meaning, nothing you said was relevant.

[Melena]

Too bad these hippie groups don't track reports where an officer pulls a taser and the suspect immediately complies. Bad news sells and you only here the 1-2% of the bad (which the majority already had pre exsisting conditions or were loaded on drugs) and never when used properly. In this case the kid deserved it. He ignored orders to stop, was warned he would get tased and the cop said fuck it game over for you and tased his dumb ass. Maybe I'm just numb to it cause I work in a jail and see punks on a daily basis try to push the envelope on what they can get away with and need a reminder that actions have consequences.

[Alleya]

Kuya I don't know if you know this but rules and laws are completely immutable and must be followed to the letter in all cases. Ambiguity, complexity, context, and individual factors are all wiggle words used by criminals to escape the perfect and infallible dispensation of justice.

[Kael]

There is no way to subdue someone without some kind of physical harm.

Tackle him? At best, slight bruising and soreness, worst outcome? Sprained joint or fractured bone.

Taze him? Laundry bill and off chance his heart gives out.

You know what the best way to avoid both of those types of injuries is?

Don't run onto the field like a douche.

[Kuya]

Kuya I don't know if you know this but rules and laws are completely immutable and must be followed to the letter in all cases. Ambiguity, complexity, context, and individual factors are all wiggle words used by criminals to escape the perfect and infallible dispensation of justice.

Seriously, i am going to have to make a thread and teach people the meaning of relevance. I say one thing, and the silly bitches bring up 1,000 different things that don't matter.

Kuya: "The Tea Party movement has similar undertones to older fascist movements"

Some twit: "But what about the price of tea in China?"

It is also interesting that the argument me, archi, and the report used are making is essentially the same argument most liberals make as to why dealth penalties are bad. Meaning, the chance of killing an innocent person, no matter how small, does not justify the death penalty existing. In this case, the chance of killing an innocent person, and even a douchebag since being a douchebag does not justify death, does not justify using the taser in a situation where no inminent and inmediate danger can be justified.

[archibaldcrane]

Just out of curiosity archi, why do you care?

Because I don't like it when cops kill people who aren't posing a threat?

Beyond that though, I feel like the nation of America needs to sit down and take a big civics lesson on crime and punishment. They need to learn that police don't dispense punishment. Police apprehend suspects, they aren't in existence to "give people what they deserve". The amount of "he deserved it" I always hear when it comes to taser controversies sickens me. He deserves whatever the law says his crime is punishable. Temporarily debilitating, very painful and potentially fatal high voltage electric shocks are nowhere in the punishment for trespassing.

Using tasers to gain compliance from non-threatening subjects is simply lazy, abusive police work.

[Melena]

Unfortunately with the way the world is, the second they are on the field they are a threat. Not just to the people around him but to themselves as well. You have to assume the worst now and it sucks.

[Yuri-G]

Because I don't like it when cops kill people who aren't posing a threat?

Beyond that though, I feel like the nation of America needs to sit down and take a big civics lesson on crime and punishment. They need to learn that police don't dispense punishment. Police apprehend suspects, they aren't in existence to "give people what they deserve". The amount of "he deserved it" I always hear when it comes to taser controversies sickens me. He deserves whatever the law says his crime is punishable. Temporarily debilitating, very painful and potentially fatal high voltage electric shocks are nowhere in the punishment for trespassing.

Using tasers to gain compliance from non-threatening subjects is simply lazy, abusive police work.

this is perhaps the most intelligent thing I have ever heard anyone say in any cop-related thread. I have been trying to put my feelings regarding police and crime into words for the longest time and this hits the nail on the head. bravo.

[archibaldcrane]

Unfortunately with the way the world is, the second they are on the field they are treated as a threat.

Fixed to point out the problem.

[BRP]

What if he had a bomb up his ass?

OR

He COULD have used his penis as a weapon.

EDIT: Though I am stuck with the thought of nude streakers lol.

[Tyche]

Ready? OVERREACT AMERICA!

[Moss]

Fixed to point out the problem.

But why shouldn't they be treated as a threat? Every person in their right mind knows you can't run onto the field during a sporting event. If someone is intentionally breaking the law for no defensible reason, they should be considered a threat. A person runs onto the field to either get to one of the players or coaches, or just to be an idiot. I don't think we need special rules for the "oh he is just being an idiot, go easy on him, chase him all day if you have to" situations. I still think the core of this argument is that you view tasers as lotteries of death, while I see them as a reasonable means of subjection.

[Correction]

INMEDIATE