Oh, really? What was he going to do? Fry them with his laser vision? Blow them out of the door with a hurricane breath? Break the handcuffs with a flex of his mighty wrists? Dude, the situation was under control until people started trying to shove stuff up his dick. Solution to me seems pretty clear: stop trying to shove stuff up his dick. And WTF do you mean "he got shown the door"? He didn't get "shown the door," he got tortured.
Just an analogy. He thought he could play the hard ass and it cost him. That's the consequence of his actions. And to your question (I won't even entertain your rediculous questions), he could have easily broken the bed, assuming he was hand-cuffed to those flimsy metal hospital bed side walls. But that's all conjecture. Exactly why the officer did what he did. To ENSURE the safety of all involved. He didn't have time to guess what the future may hold for the situation. It had to be controlled immediately and without qustion. I wonder how this would be received if the guy broke free and harmed/killed a hospital worker? Would the officer then have been guilty of not doing enough? Most likely. Regardless. Going in circles is tiring. As always, though, it's refreshing to have level headed conversation.
I don't see how this bed can be that flimsy if it can take a man stuggling on it, and the force of a police officer jumping on it. The safety issue is, I fear, a non-starter for you. A restrained man was repeatedly given electric shocks for refusing to give a urine sample. That's what happened. You can attempt to cloud the issue with conjecture about the safety of others, or what we'd say if this was someone resisting arrest at a roadside, but it doesn't changed what happened. A man was tortured. That is unacceptable in any supposedly civilised country.
To all you defending the officer and his action. I garuntee because of the officers actions 18 year old Wheeler will have all his charges dropped. Good policing involves arresting a suspect, charging a suspect and getting a conviction. No conviction = Bad policing. Thanx Transbot90210
There's the biggie, right there. Poor choices by law enforcement = additional legal leverage for lawbreakers. With all the crap officers have to deal with, I'm delighted they've got tasers, and can weild them with quite a bit more leeway than a gun. At the same time, though, this was poor judgement.
Herein lies the problem. He wasn't resisting arrest. He had already been successfully arrested and charged at this point, prior to being brought to the ER. He was resisting hospital policy, which does not usually tend to be justifiably enforceable by taser.
If you think some straps and cuffs could stop a crackhead from flipping out and hurting himself and others, you're sorely mistaken. The guy strapped to the bed could have easily struggled so much he would end up grievously injuring himself and possibly others, even if he was strapped down. He was aggressively resisting in this situation and being tasered more then likely prevented him from being more seriously injured. He could have easily ripped and torn his own body and not have noticed it, while tasering him would stop him from flailing not because it's painful, but because causes all the muscles to stop moving. 1) A Hospital bed can easily be broken by a flailing, doped up man. Even if he was strapped down. 2) He was not tasered because he refused to give a urine sample, he was tasered because he FLIPPED OUT. It's not like he was repeatedly tasered over the course of hours for not pissing, he was in the throws of violently thrashing about when the cop was forced to stop him. It takes a split second to taser someone, especially someone who's high on drugs and spazzing out. No he most certainly was not. And to those who honestly felt it would have been better to just leave a crack head chained to a bed until he decided it was time to pee, that could have been potentially fatal for him. And a far more tortuous act then being tasered. Edit: This is both true and incorrect, while he was already under arrest and refusing to comply with "hospital policy", that's not why he was tasered. He was tasered because he was spazzing out and became a danger to himself and those around him. This isn't a case of "pee or I'll zap you" so many are making it out to be, this is a case of a crack head flipping out and needing to be dealt with.
If they found coke on him, as the end of the report states, why was it even necessary to get a urine sample right then and there? Stick a needle in his arm and sedate him for christs sake. That is what a medical-iv is for after all. This was torture plain and simple. oh and... coke=/=crack
Because if he had taken the drugs and you just stab some more into his system blindly, it could kill him. Especially if he's taken a large amount. And all this "It's tortue!" BS is just garbage, plain and simple. This was a crack head resisting arrest and medical treatment, these people weren't intentionally hurting him for any sick, sadistic pleasure or anything, they were trying to help him. But because he was refusing to comply with anything they asked of him, they had to use force. If he refused to PEE for them, what makes you think he would have let them inject him with something?
Fair enough, but there could have been several ways of accomplishing the medical task without tasering the guy.
double post. But I'm sure it didn't help the situation that the cop was probably standing over the guy the entire thereby making him freak out even more. Edit: I'm actually not that mad over the tasering, but the situation itself. Just another example that drug laws and the way we respond to situations involving drug use must be re-evaluated.
okay the dude had no cocaine in his system so what was the effing point of resisting giving a urine sample? was he hoping for something he could use for leverage to get plea deal? oi and once agaion both sides could have handled this better
since tasers kill a lot of people, using one on someone suspected of doing cocaine is just stupid, elevated heart rate from the cocaine can put you very close to heart attack, zapping him a couple times is attempted murder as far as i am concerned
HE WAS NOT RESISTING ARREST. Read the fraggin' article. He was resisting having something shoved up his cock. If you can't even read well enough to understand this, how the hell can you expect anyone to take anything else you say seriously?
true , but it also says he refused to willingly give a urine sample first, still not saying either side is right or wrong just that it was handled poorly all around
People have a right to resist arrest. The law exists. More people should. I hate drugs. I don't respect people who use them. Not for a moment. But I also don't dispute their right to use them and find drug laws to be a violation of civil rights. Victimless crime is an opinion. It's also a paranoia. Rights aren't granted, they're battled for. We, as citizens, determine what our rights are ultimately. We can't leave it up to any books to tell us what we can and cannot do.
Bull fucking shit. I don't know what hospital you go to, but those damn things do not break down because you flail about. Oh, and you don't gain superhuman strength on cocaine. Seriously, people, yank your heads from your asses before you post. God, what is fucking wrong with people?
You sure do. Just don't be surprised when you get tasered. So much for rational discussion. Google cocaine rage and see how many articles come up. And sod off while your at it.
