What is Digg?39 Comments
- ScionX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19"The new dart contains a small explosive charge which detonates when it hits the target."
Yea, nothing says "Non-Lethal" like an explosive charge upon impact........ - tomboy501, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18I like how they call it a stunner. Such a nice word. It doesn't really quite stun you - more like electrocute every nerve-ending in your body and send you into uncontrollable spastic convulsions that are probably as close to violent death as most people could ever come.
- scrubadub, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Of course a taser is better than a bullet, the problem is cops will use them 100x often than they would've shot someone.
- kp3469, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15i'd rather take my chances with a tazer than a bullet.
- d2nd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"i'd rather take my chances with a tazer than a bullet."
is weak reasoning, only works if law enforcement is equally willing to use taser or gun. It appears as if police officers hesitate alot less to pull the trigger on a taser. - sfacets, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Yet another method of controlling us. Store it next to teargass, rubber bullets and nerve gas.
- sfacets, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Another way to control your freedom.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Tasers are tools of torture.
Torturers deserve to die painful and humiliating deaths. - TheKrillr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I'm sure that being hit by an exploding dart is stunning enough as it is.
- gwolf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Better non lethals are a good thing, but a certain kind of cop will use it to torture a suspect rather than subdue them. What’s needed is a good method for controlling someone who is out of control without bludgeoning them to death. How about registering stun devices to the officers and embedding a chip in it to record how it is used; time, date number of shocks so that it discourages misuse. It’s a weapon like any other and there needs to be the same kind of accountability for it as a firearm.
- jcims, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Could have been this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-If0ZTEx2p8
Seriously though, Tazers aren't some evil scourge...they are a tool like anything else, and I would have to say that given a choice between 75 thousand volts and 750ft/lbs from the Sig beside it, I would pick getting lit up every time.
I didn't watch the whole first video, but the second one wasn't, IMO, a 'clear case' of excessive force. A cop can not let you go simply because you resist being arrested, and getting into a physical altercation with someone that's drunk/high/pissed off is inviting serious injury to both parties (broken teeth, sprained joints, etc). There are certainly bad cops out there that use Tazers without due case, but if you look at the thousands of cases where they are used without permanent injury, I would have to think they have saved more lives than they have cost. - bloqmon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Freedom? Since when? Psha and monkeys will fly out of my butt.
- StarCrusher, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Yeah, 'cause there's nothing we need more than the 167 or so Taser deaths reported so far for a "non-lethal" device. See http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special43/articles/1224taserlist24-ON.html
How about we just plan on winging them with a 30-30? - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3All that hero crap about having to take down ultra strong amphetimine powered ruffians is a load of crap.
How many outstanding default warrants are there in your jurisdiction? What is your solution rate for burglaries? THAT is the fraction of your pay you deserve to actually receive.
You bust people on minor drug charges at traffic stops. Many of those people commit other minor crimes. If it were not for these cheap-ass busts, you would solve approximately ZERO crimes.
So cut the hero crap. All we can hope for is that you don't go on disability fraudulently. - dacheetah, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4From a quick look through the list of people who have died from tasers, it seems that if you don't take cocaine, your fairly safe, if you don't take cocaine, amphetamines, or have paranoid schizophrenia, then you're only real danger is hitting your head when you fall, and that'll happen just as often when tackled to the ground without a taser.
And the explosion isn't any more dangrous than a cap gun, it's there to cause compression of quartz to generate a pulse of high voltage. I'd definately prefer to be hit with a long range taser than a bullet, rubber or otherwise... Hell, it'd probably hurt less than being tackled to the ground by some cops... - spooq, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The war is over, you can both come out of the jungle now.
- dacheetah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, a quick look through the posts starfoxy has made in other thread, and the fact [s]he hasn't dugg or submitted a single story makes me think this account was made for the sole purpose of trolling.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If the police actually solved crimes that matter to taxpayers like me I'd have some sympathy. Police effectiveness sucks. Police solve hardly any property crimes. Big city police can't even keep the rape and murder solution rates above embarrassingly low rates. Revenue chasing. Disability fraud. Overtime fraud. Corruption. Thuggery. These are the hallmarks of police today.
Even with more cop-propaganda on TV than ever, your reputation sucks. Clean your own house before even thinking of complaining about what people think of you.
In fact, I'd bet 90% of Diggers think police are less costly, less corrupt, and more effective than they really are. Anyone out there who thinks I'm wrong should start searching Digg for "police" and start googling around. The more you know, the more horrible it looks. - Colonel45, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"How about registering stun devices to the officers and embedding a chip in it to record how it is used; time, date number of shocks so that it discourages misuse."
I think you might be one of the few intelligent people on digg. I have seen cops misuse Tazers on people. There is no need to prolong the tazer process for more than a few seconds if that since the person literally is left powerless. I agree with your words. The tazers should be chipped to record usage and voltage. - Barryke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Indeed, logging time and usage would be great.
Lets also log the victim's actions - so that we can verify it against the other variable. - zediker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3ok, so you dont like guns, and you dont like tazers... what do you like? we have to start somewhere, might as well state what IS acceptable.
- nocountries, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1when I saw the heading I envisaged a binoculars-view of a stunning model with, well, explosive darts!
- HeliumHigh, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5My step father is a cop, and from what I know of the logistics of it, cops would only use a tazer if they needed to. The usage might be slightly higher, but it is a safer and more effective means of disabling a threat then a gun. Will cops use them more? Yes. Is that bad? No.
- zoom1928, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Cops would never go for that since they could only hit the victim once. They couldn't torture the person by hitting the trigger over and over again. If you've ever watched one of the thugs in blue use a taser, you've most likely seen them hit someone several times.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7While tasers are immensely powerful, that doesn't mean they're deadly, regardless of death.
People die on rollercoasters semi-regularly. It doesn't mean that the rollercoasterrs are deadly, it just means that the people weren't physically well enough to ride.
Of course, rollercoasters are optional, whereas tasers are not necessarily always 'optional.' - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Would you rather be shot with a taser or a 9 mm pistol? Hmmm? That's what I thought.
- darkpixel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Tomboy, you are a f*ckstick.
It's nothing like dying. It's nothing like getting hit with a 45--or even a 9mm.
A lot of people here love to bash the police--but why? Yeah, some of them are corrupt. But I think the main reason sh*theads like you don't like the police is that you don't like being told "You're wrong".
Society has rules and consequences. Follow the rules of our society or face the consequences. If you don't like the rules, move somewhere else that has rules you accept. No one is forcing you to stay here.
Stop bashing the people who have the courage to stand up for what is right and deal with those who do wrong. - crazyguy821, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I guess I shouldnt be too suprised by the common response here, what kind of idiots have invaded digg? "The tazer is torture" ect.... go hug a damn tree and get off the internet you are using precious power that was probably produced by creating greenhouse gasses, who let the hippies in?
This ***** amazes me, you have a technology that keeps our officers and the criminals from greater harm and people actually balk at it? Goes to show that the general cross section of the world...not just america are complete idiots. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0This means nothing if there is no insufficient current. Voltage + current = burnt ass Voltage just + = tingiling sensation.
- jcims, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Here's a newsflash: Some criminals don't like to be caught.
One of the many responsibilities LEOs have is to apprehend criminals. Now, if we accept my previous assertion that some criminals don't like to be caught, what is the LEO to do? They could a) let them go or b) detain them against their will or c) kill them.
Assuming most of us want the police to be effective at taking criminals off the street (+1), i can't imagine that option 'a' is terribly viable. Option 'c' on the other hand, while very effective at taking criminals off the street, lacks the peer review process that prevents innocent folks from receiving improper treatment. Given that 'c' is, as far as i know, non-reversible, it's not terribly acceptable either.
That leaves us with option 'b'. Now, i don't know about you, but most of the criminal element that i see are fairly healthy, young males that may or may not be high and/or drunk at the time. I'm sure there are certain LEOs out there that would be very effective at overpowering this element and forcing compliance through raw physical strength, but if they do exist, they aren't in my town. Even if they were, add two or three additional healthy young males to the criminal element side, and you now have a scenario where even the most fit officer would be at a distinct disadvantage.
One option to avoid this would be to hire at least twice the number of officers, so at no time does an officer need to be alone. However, this is very costly, and for the 98% of the time where nothing is going on, very wasteful as well. What to do? Without additional personnel, the only realistic way for a single officer to detain one or more criminals _against their will_ is to equip them with some form of force multiplier. The sidearm is one force multiplier, but has the unfortunate side effect of implementing our option 'c' without due process. A nightstick is another form of force multiplier, but requires training to be truly effective as an incapacitating force, and has the nasty habit of breaking bones and causing other blunt trauma. Mace/OC spray is yet another force multiplier, but in addition to being completely ineffective on a small portion of the populace, also has the nasty habit of blowing back in the face of the officer that uses it, and in general persisting after use, making handling the criminal a bit more tricky.
That leaves us with the Tazer and similar devices. Clean, easy to use, very effective and, for the healthly young males it is most commonly used on, relatively safe. Does that mean it will not be misused? Of course not? Does it make it more likely to be abused, possibly. Should we stop using tools because they are so effective at what they do that they could be misused? If so, lets start with you and that computer you've misused to pollute digg even further. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2"i'd rather take my chances with a tazer than a bullet."
or even a 'nonleathal' rubber bullet - z3rgRush, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Tazers make the world a better place!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8fD6YvyJk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlsjjtLNvM8 - henryaj, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Shut the ***** up you ***** prole.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is