At last, something we agree on.
The link in that post directly contradicts what you’re asserting and directly supports Shodan’s contention.
Seems this is becoming quite a pattern for you in this thread. Is it just a war of attrition for you at this point, as you throw out more and more misleading horseshit in the hope others will give up on correcting you? So you can salvage your pride and declare victory in a dead thread? Dream on, chum.
Well, a lot has been said since I left for work a few hours ago and I’m not sure where to pick up from, but I simply can’t ignore about the most asinine argument of the entire thread:
There’s no logic to your conclusion that justifying the use of a non/less-lethal taser further justifies the use of deadly force. It’s not even close to the same thing and you know it. Nobody, other than you, that deadly force ought to be used to force compliance.
You are also the only one suggesting that granny forfeited rights by resisting arrest, yet you haven’t decided to tell anyone what rights those were. The fact is she didn’t forfeit any rights and her rights were not compromised by the officer’s actions in any way.
The officer used his judgment, in accordance with policy, to determine the best way to enforce compliance with his legal orders, in accordance with policy, and fulfill his duties as a law enforcement officer while trying to do so in a safe and expedient manner. You may not agree with that judgment, but those of us whose knees aren’t quite so twitchy don’t see a problem with it.
Myself, I don’t really see the billy-club thing as valid (although in this particular case, I’d probably look the other way if he whacked that cow up the side of her head :p). The taser was probably less likely to injure granny than having her brittle bones manhandled. Not so the billy club.
But since we’re exploring Hypothetical Land, what if he had fragged her with a grenade or dropped a rattlesnake down her blouse? Would you all support him then?
You can always count on the police for a fair analysis of a situation. The cops are never at fault. They were just forced by the situation to subdue a dangerous and belligerent old woman. She was a genuine threat and he could have justified shooting her. he kept a level head and merely tased her. I always go to the police and politicians to give me the truth.
Wrong. It has never been anyone’s arguments that Bieze broke procedure or laws. If that’s what Shodan’s point was, he was attacking a straw man. I’ve been saying that he could have handled the situation better, and the Sgt. Major agrees with me. The Sheriff of the county this took place in also agrees with me, and regardless of whether or not Bieze reports to him, a high-ranking local official’s opinion should carry some weight.
And this is really crux of the matter. You just can’t trust the police. They are always doing something wrong and they will always cover it up and lie to protect themselves.
Really. Sometimes a pig is just a pig.
No sense trying to debate with you anymore.
Perhaps this should have been your first clue that this conclusion you refer to doesn’t exist. It was HOW you were justifying the use of a non/less-lethal taser, which also justified the use of deadly force. If you think it’s asinine… THAT’S THE POINT!
Nobody including me.
I don’t see how you could have been so terribly mistaken, unless like Telemark you are uninterested in actually presenting an argument, and have decided to voice your baseless disagreement by posting random nonsense.
?..and where did I do that?
I can guess where you might THINK did… but I’d suggest you actually read it before quoting. 
He judged badly.
If he can’t do better than that, he should quit or be fired.
The fact you fail to see something does not mean it doesn’t exist.
:smack: What have you been wasting all of our time for, then? Apparently, you’re (now?) willing to admit that the deputy did his job just the way he should have. You just adopt a wholly unrelated elected official’s PR weasel words that the deputy just should have somehow “handled it better”, for whatever shifting value of “better” you can dig out of your bowels in response to any given post.
No, I’m not saying he did his job just the way he should have. I’m saying he didn’t break procedure or any laws. God damn, you have not been reading this thread, have you? READ before you post. READ before you post. Say it 50 times before bed every night. Maybe eventually you’ll get it.
Much to my regret, I have read the entire thing. And although you now admit that he violated no laws and followed the correct procedures, I recall back at the beginning of the thread you said:
I’m glad I don’t live in whatever jurisdiction you do, if people get thrown in jail and have their careers ruined after violating no law and not breaking any procedure they’ve been trained in, but just because they “should have handled it better.”
Dude, I don’t know what you’re smokin, but I never said it justified the use the deadly force. You jumped on that mechanical bull all by yourself, cowboy.
Ah well, let’s see…
So…we can establish that you were the one that brought up deadly force. What’s that you say about random nonsense?
Not so much. He did his job in a safe and expedient manner. Nobody got hurt. The law was enforced. His boss recognizes his actions as in accordance with policy. Seems his judgment worked out just fine.
Because you are unhappy with the outcome? Boo hoo.
Ah, but in this instance I see a cop who did everything by the book (so sayeth his boss) and an immature lady who learned a valuable lesson even at the ripe old age of 72. All seems to be right with the universe from where I’m standing.
What if he wrested her to the ground and dislocated her shoulder or broke her calcium depleted bones? What if she went into an asthma attack from pepper spray? We’ll never know because he used the path of least injurious action.
Yeah . . . I’m not buying that you’ve read the thread, because I’ve said many, many, many times that he was not legally in the wrong, and not once have I said he was legally in the wrong. Or maybe you read the thread and just didn’t comprehend it? Everyone else got it, because only you and Shodan are playing “HaHAH! GOTCHA!” with the law. What I said should happen to him has no bearing on whether or not what he did was legal, and I acknowledged a few posts later that the post you’re referencing was at least somewhat hyperbolic.
You have not established this officer undermined anything. The officers only purpose in this incident was to give a speeder a ticket. It was a nasty old women who made it into something else. His job is to protect and serve. When you go from speeder eligible for a ticket to someone resisting arrest by your own ignorant behavior you become the criminal the rest of society is being protected against. {even if you’re a low grade one} He was serving his purpose by arresting her.
I repeat , there are proper guidelines and parameters for police policy and behavior ranging from doing your job correctly without a lot of finesse and the ideal which might be incredible patience and communication skills that diffuse almost every situation Neither society or it’s paid police force owes it to anyone to do more than the minimum of doing the job correctly without finesse. If you roll the dice and become a person warranting arrest you take what you get within those acceptable parameters.
You’re laying down some rubber there with all that backtracking. Nice try.
Just ignore that guy. He likes to missread things and strawman then run off to the beach to hide when called on it.
…and I didn’t say you did. You’re really not big on the whole reading thing are you?
I never said I didn’t bring up deadly force. Seriously… READ!
Newsflash from Brown Eyed Girl:
TASERS DON’T HURT!!!
Nope… seriously. SERIOUSLY. Just read before responding.
And that’s how it’ll always look as long as you choose to live in your own little world. Good for you. I don’t know why you trouble yourself by posting here though, if you aren’t interested in backing up your opinion in any way.
Sigh. I’m sure everyone else knew what I meant, but I’ll slow it down for you. Nobody got seriously hurt or in any way that left any long-lasting effects.
HA! HA ha hahaha! I posted several links to studies and reports by independent authorities analyzing ESDs and their effects as well as actual CODs reported for in-custody deaths and analysis of in-custody deaths. You better damn believe I back up my opinion. I back it up solid, but let me guess. You didn’t read any of it, did you?
You have posted exactly **zero **evidence backing up your opinion. I’m under no illusion that you even understand what you’re trying to say anyway.
Wow. Please tell me you’re not serious. Ok, just do me a favor, and read these posts, posted pages ago, and then come back and acknowledge that you are wrong, ok? Can you do that?
Again, these were all hundreds of posts ago. Please acknowledge whatever caused you to accuse me of “backpedaling”, because I’m pretty clearly not.
Thank you.