I think police are a bit too taser-happy, thinking it is a safe way to subdue someone immediately. Obviously this was unnecessary, and I certainly hope an investigation is launched.
That being said, I was stuck in an airport once for 12 hours and didn't do anything but wait patiently the whole time. Admittedly, I could understand what the airport and airline staff were telling me about the delays, but they were completely wrong anyways (it'll just be another half an hour, another fifteen minutes, et cetera). I don't understand why this guy's reaction was to start knocking shit over and what have you. I'm sure it's described much more violently than it actually was, but it was still a pretty bad reaction. He was obviously disoriented and there is no way that it called for a tasering (never mind a lethal tasering) and I have to feel bad for the guy, but the simple fact is that an airport is the worst place you can freak out (especially coupled with any foreign language) these days. Even a mild showing of hostility can get you removed from an airport altogether, or make you subject to searches.
I really don't understand why they had to taser him twice (or even once). It was a really godawful reaction by the police to a bad reaction by some confused guy, and it sucks. It kind of makes you miss the good old days when the cops had nightsticks and would just give you a beating if they decided to overreact instead of sending however many volts of electricity running through you.
During this whole time, everyone can be heard saying "He speaks Russian" or "We need a Russian translator." Not only does everyone make a random assumption about what language he's speaking, but no one actually does anything to help the language barrier.I don't disagree with you about how bad this was, but this statement is pretty ridiculous. What do you expect these people to do? They're just bystanders. Most people can't tell the difference between RUSSIAN AND GERMAN let alone a pretty obscure language like POLISH (it may not seem that obscure but uh... I am pretty sure most people don't realise how many polskis are around here). They were in an airport for a short amount of time (that this part was taking place). Do you think maybe they should've hired some sort of translator online and got him to come down and decipher what he was saying while he was freaking out? It doesn't matter what the bystanders were saying; they couldn't do anything. It's completely unfair to blame them in any way.
I assume the guy had SOME knowledge of EnglishIn Eastern European countries languages like German and French far surpass English as the most important second language. English really isn't that widespread once you get into the heart of Europe. It's like assuming an American is capable of understanding some basic French/German/Spanish, all of which are more widespread than English in central-Europe. I'm not even sure if some of the countries even has English in the school.
He started yelling in Polish for someone to help him, broke a computer, and threw a chair. The Mounties came, tasered him twice and killed him. He offered no resistance.
Being a Polish immigrant myself, I guess I am a little BIASED, but no matter what nationality, this is really frightening!
You know... here in the states.. you can get shot just for putting your hands in your pocket while confronting the police. Tasering... despite the incidents we've had here recently (including a death) I still think this is a better alternative than getting shot.what?
Seriously, I don't understand what you're trying to convey here... how is putting your hands high up in the air and backing up against a wall anything remotely similar to putting your hands in your pockets or giving off a sense of DANGER to the authorities?
Now I can really only understand tazer use if the person to be tazed pulls a weapon and attemps to hurt someone, or something around those lines. I think these Canadians where using the tazers based on how dangerous they thought they were, rather than by regulation of use.
Hidden content (Click to reveal)This isn't just an "irate immigrant being tasered". It's an example of ridiculously excessive police brutality that resulted in the death of an unarmed person (and an apparent cover-up by the police that never would've been proven wrong if it weren't for the age of camera phones and youtube that we live in now). Believe it or not but people do not take this shit very lightly! The fucking LA riots happened just because the cops beat someone up. I can't imagine what would've happened if they actually killed Rodney King, too. And yeah, the guy was irate, but why was that so? He wasn't just some maniac; he just came off a 10 hour flight and then had to spend an additional 10 hours waiting in an airport while dealing with border security and immigration officers. On top of that he was in a country where he doesn't even speak the language. I do not want to meet the fucking person who is still calm and collected after going through that ordeal! So what if he smashed a few things? Is a fucking $200 computer monitor from Radioshack that costs nothing to the airport and could be replaced very quickly really worth a human life?
What the fuck does this even mean? What difference does it make if you get tasered or shot if you end up dead? Why should we accept the fact that the only options that the police can use nowadays have to involve either guns or tasers? Like I said in my first post, why couldn't they have just maced him instead?What if he died to the reaction he had to mace? What of he went into a coma from the other non lethal solutions police use to apprehend people (which includes chokes/ holds). Like I said, it's unfortunate, but the fact that someone dies does not mean the actions someone took where excessive. But it's nice to complain after the fact... isn't it. I understand that he offered no resistance when he was being arrested... but that does not negate the violent behavior he had already shown. Police respond to you based on the actions you already took... and for not being able to understand what this man was saying... I say the actions they took where reasonable.
I couldn't care less what you guys are bitching about. My point was the guy was throwing a fit... noone could tell what he was on about... and that anything was up for grabs at that point. They could have responded in several different ways... but all they did was taser him. It's unfortunate that he died... but that doesn't make the actions the police took any more excessive. If I am in an airport or government office and I see some guy screaming gibberish, throwing chairs, and kicking in computers... I would hope they would taser his ass too.He raised his hands, he wasn't putting up resistance after the police came in, he stopped doing everything he was doing THAT WAS SO BAD.
Does it matter what his situation was? What if he was some nut job with a bomb strapped to his chest, and the police didn't find out until after they tasered him. I bet you would have thought their actions where justified then.He rasied his hands, therefore, hey look if I raise my hands I will trigger the bomb and kill everyone(I always thought raising your hands means hey i give up). The mace has a much less chance of killing someone, hey breathing in shit that makes you cough and wheeze compared to electric shock, I'd take the first one. Also, coma > death, since a coma from a choke hold I dont think would have a chance of putting him in one for 10 years.
What if he died to the reaction he had to mace? What of he went into a coma from the other non lethal solutions police use to apprehend people (which includes chokes/ holds). Like I said, it's unfortunate, but the fact that someone dies does not mean the actions someone took where excessive. But it's nice to complain after the fact... isn't it.
It must be nice being white. Really. You guys obviously have better experiances/ expectations than I do.
Shut up, you are an idiot.
4. Law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms. They may use force and firearms only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the intended result.
5. Whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall:
(a) Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved;
(b) Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life;
(c) Ensure that assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment;
(d) Ensure that relatives or close friends of the injured or affected person are notified at the earliest possible moment.
7. Governments shall ensure that arbitrary or abusive use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials is punished as a criminal offence under their law.
I would just like to contribute this:Obviously these were libertarian cops: they don't believe in the UN.
UN Use Of Force Guidelines (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/i2bpuff.htm)
Some select quotes
So basically, because you're not white, you not only EXPECT police injustice towards you, but you also pass it off as being "justified."
Way to stick up for your race :thumbsupbuddy:
Shut up, you are an idiot.
Of course it would be justified if he had a fucking bomb strapped on his chest
It's a fucking topic on gamingworld. People post their thoughts. What, we have to be trained professionals in law enforcement before our words have any merit? I'm not allowed to call out police brutality after the cops taser and murder an unarmed man who had his hands up in the air because I am not 100% fully educated in police protocol?
I would just like to contribute this:And with that, I feel this topic might come to an end, because the discussion isn't going the way it should anymore, and I doubt this will fix itself.
UN Use Of Force Guidelines (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/i2bpuff.htm)
Some select quotesQuote4. Law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms. They may use force and firearms only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the intended result.Quote5. Whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall:
(a) Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved;
(b) Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life;
(c) Ensure that assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment;
(d) Ensure that relatives or close friends of the injured or affected person are notified at the earliest possible moment.Quote7. Governments shall ensure that arbitrary or abusive use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials is punished as a criminal offence under their law.