Rory Rickwood's Taser Protest Image
I have long expressed my opinion on Tasers and the use of them by police officers against the general public. There is ample evidence that the cops are using them inappropriately and that their issue and use has escalated the number of killings by police.
There are many web sites reporting on Taser use and abuse but none that research the subject as well as Excited-Delirium.com. If you believe Taser International’s claims that their wicked products are safe I suggest you take a look at the reports and in depth analysis of Excited-Delirium.
As an additional view I bring you the following article by Charlie Prenicolas, a legal researcher. There are links at the foot of the article that lead to a US civil rights lawyer. The Duck Shoot does not monetarily benefit from this link, the terms of use of the article are that I publish the authors links.
Charlie Prenicolas
Police Taser Injuries and Deaths in the United States
By Charlie Prenicolas
Police brutality has recently gained attention in the United States. Many of us have seen horrible videos of police brutality on television. Often, police brutality results in serious injuries and even wrongful death. And more often than not, Tasers play the devil’s role in cases of police brutality.
First, let us take a look at what a Taser is all about. “Taser” stands for “Thomas A. Swift’s Electric Rifle”. This is not a child’s toy as the name implies in the acronym which is character that appeared in children’s books written in the early 20th century. This is a weapon that shoots two dart, each attached to a thin wire, to the victim. When these dart-like electrodes make contact an electrical currents is sent through the wires and into the victim to stun him or her into submission. The victim often feels helpless, thus he is easily controlled without the use of too much force.
When Taser was introduced and gained popularity of use in the early 1990s, it was considered as ‘non-deadly’ alternative to the use of firearms in subduing criminals. Be that as it may, serious injury and death cases have been documented to result from the use of Tasers by law enforcement officers. Further, the use of Taser by the police has alarmed civil right groups as this is often used abusively by the authorities to subdue criminals even though these criminals are unarmed. Civil rights activists say that instead of being used only as an alternative in cases in which firearms would be used, Tasers are more often used to merely restrain criminals in any type of arrest situation.
What has alarmed the public in recent years about the use of Taser by authorities is the fact that it has been used by the authorities not just on individuals who object an officer’s aggression but on mentally-disabled, handicapped, pregnant and non-English speakers as well. We have seen cases over the years of police brutality involving the abusive use of Tasers on internet video databases such as YouTube and LiveLeak. Often, these videos of police brutality incidents are quite astonishly graphic and disturbing.
In a report made by the Amnesty International, the use of Tasers by the police authorities has claimed 351 lives since 2001. Slightly less than ten percent of these victims were carrying a weapon upon their arrest. In Illinois, the first state in the US to require stun gun owners to get a license, use of Tasers on unarmed teenager, an 82-year-old woman, and three adolescents have been documented. This is completely alarming because the use of Tasers in these cases is unacceptable and unlawful.
Verdicts involving Taser injury and Taser wrongful deaths are not easy to win. In case you or a loved one is a victim, get a good civil rights lawyer to help you build a strong case against law enforcement officials who used Taser illegally. Often, it is difficult to look for witnesses to support your story against law enforcement authorities. Getting a reputable civil rights lawyer is a key to winning your case against these abusive law enforcers.
Charlie Prenicolas is a legal researcher who writes informative articles on Illinois civil rights, medical malpractice, and personal injury cases. For more information on reputable Chicago civil right lawyers, kindly visit Dolan Law Offices today.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Charlie_Prenicolas
http://EzineArticles.com/?Police-Taser-Injuries-and-Deaths-in-the-United-States&id=3036270
Should Tasers Be Banned?
I invite you to comment on this story and the whole issue of the use of Tasers by the police. What’s your opinion? Should they be banned altogether? Should only well-trained officers have them?
The Duck Shoot Opinion: Tasers should be classified as instruments of torture and banned. The body investigating police complaints should be genuinely independent and incidents should automatically go before a judge and jury. Where a member of the public is injured or killed by police the officer or officers should be suspended without pay until a court clears them. That would see a reduction in cops using illegal tactics and it would restore public faith in the police.
Related posts:
- Police Taser Torture: So You Think Tasers Are Non-Lethal? I find it incredible that there are, despite all the...
- Taser Torture: “Stop Taser Torture – Blogging For Justice Day” Stop The Taser Torture - Blogging for Justice Day has...
- Police Taser Brutality: Six Minneapolis Cops Beat, Kick & Taser Un-Armed Man This video, provided by Attorney Paul Edlund, shows six Minneapolis...
- Police Taser Brutality: Blind Woman Tasered In Her Own Home Now I am not suggesting that all cops are ignorant,...
- Police Taser Brutality: Three More Americans Tortured To Death In just five days since I last updated the list...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
You said, “you have only half answered my questions or not answered them at all”. Which half of the answers did I not answer at all, the half I did answer or the half I didn’t answer? What exactly have I not answered?
Then you said, “You still haven’t given me an alternative to the taser that you think is appropriate.” The best question to ask is what did you cops do before Tasers? The answer should be, they held a man, hand-cuffed him depending on the offence and took him to a police station. No guns, no batons, no CS gas. You don’t need an alternative to Tasers. It was a matter of British pride that our police force was unarmed.
The IPCC may never be perfect but with the ‘friends of power’ that run it at the moment it is not even second best.
Only made movies can be sensational, CCTV is a record of actual events. It clearly showed the cops breaking the law by punching Mark Aspinal. The arrest was illegal, the cop violence was illegal therefore he was entitled to bite them. He was cuffed so he couldn’t fight them off with his hands.
It is clear they are guilty and if they get away with it it will be no surprise to me as the cops get away with everything from speeding, corruption, violence and murder.
Thanks for your lengthy reply Dave, although you have only half answered my questions or not answered them at all. You still haven’t given me an alternative to the taser that you think is appropriate.
The IPCC is about as independent as you will be able to get for a body that investigates police conduct. Despite what you say it is independent and as a result the British Police are the most accountable in the world.
I haven’t defended any cops on this blog. I have just refused to attack them based on some edited and sensationalised cctv footage from a rag tag Sunday newspaper (Mark Aspinall incident). Naive folk like yourself are often taken in by such stories that aim to distort the truth with clever spin. I have already said that if those cops are guilty then they deserve what thet get so I don’t “defend those wankers” as you so eloquently state. I will write on this blog to condemn them.
On the other hand if they are cleared or the truth shows that Mark Aspinall was a vile drunken yob who was out to cause mayhem, then I would expect you to retract some of the bile that you have penned on this matter.
JOE: Just to throw my opinion into the ring, your “instruments of torture” argument is a bit dramatic don’t you think?
Dave Knight: This is answered here: What is torture?
JOE: The taser is designed to temporarily incapacitate somebody, not to torture them.
Dave Knight: How temporary is DEAD?
JOE: If tasers are banned then what do you see as an alternative to deal with violent suspects? Batons, CS spray, fists?
Dave Knight: Police are mostly using Tasers against non-violent people and often after the suspect (innocent until proven guilty as you so like to quote!) has been restrained.
JUST ONE instant of Tasers being used against non-violent people: Pregnant Woman At Baptism Party Tasered
See here for British cops using fists: War Hero Being Bashed By Cops But you defend those wankers don’t you Joe!
JOE: You have again repeated your often used comment about us needing a body that is genuinely independent when investigating the police. We already have one of those. It’s called the IPCC (With regards to that I’m still waiting for your reply from an earlier comment on the Mark Aspinall blog. The one you deleted).
Dave Knight: I have answered this matter already Joe but I still don’t agree that the IPCC is independent in practice. Look at the Jean Paul Menezes case. The cops got away with murder!
JOE: As for your “suspended without pay” comments, I must strongly disagree. Many front line public servants such as police officers, nurses and doctors perform such a role that they are only ever one step away from a complaint and subsequent investigation.
Dave Knight: Here is the ultimate weapon of a person who really has not got a good argument, the non-sequitur, ignore the original argument and throw in an emotional deflector such as “nurses” and “doctors”. Joe, the Internet and YouTube are not brimming with stories and videos of doctors and nurses Tasering, kicking, punching, killing, slapping men, women and children.
JOE: Many of these complaints will be unfounded and the person involved will be eventually cleared. This process can take months or even years. Therefore you cannot just stop paying somebody who has no findings of guilt against them. It goes against the whole principle of “innocent until proven guilty”, a notion you claim to support.
Dave Knight: Many of the “unfounded” complaints are miscarriages of justice therefore power protecting power, which results in guilty cops back on the streets. The point is if pay is stopped the abuses will be reduced drastically, I believe, and therefore justice would speed up. What is more in the UK there is welfare so they wouldn’t be destitute.
Most of your comment was off-topic so please in future keep your comments relevant and then you may receive a reply a lot quicker. As it is much of is answered elsewhere had you bothered to look.
Just an observation of my own Joe. You never seem to comment on the really heinous police crimes like the following: Cops Taser Amputee Are you afraid to admit that your brothers-in-arms are just thugs in uniform Joe?
Just to throw my opinion into the ring, your “instruments of torture” argument is a bit dramatic don’t you think? The taser is designed to temporarily incapacitate somebody, not to torture them. If tasers are banned then what do you see as an alternative to deal with violent suspects? Batons, CS spray, fists?
You have again repeated your often used comment about us needing a body that is genuinely independent when investigating the police. We already have one of those. It’s called the IPCC (With regards to that I’m still waiting for your reply from an earlier comment on the Mark Aspinall blog. The one you deleted).
As for your “suspended without pay” comments, I must strongly disagree. Many front line public servants such as police officers, nurses and doctors perform such a role that they are only ever one step away from a complaint and subsequent investigation. Many of these complaints will be unfounded and the person involved will be eventually cleared. This process can take months or even years. Therefore you cannot just stop paying somebody who has no findings of guilt against them. It goes against the whole principle of “innocent until proven guilty”, a notion you claim to support.