phils phans... always full of class

[ashie62]

Gwreck wrote: I'm not a big fan of tasers but in this particular case, sounds perfectly acceptable to me and if it acts as further deterrent to running on the field, even better.

I would tase Jeter repeatedly

[Centerfield]

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Does anyone else hear 70s-cop-show funk-with-bongos when they see that?

[Centerfield]

I love how the cop is making a gun with the fingers of his other hand.

[metirish]

As punishment for running onto the field this asshole should wear a sign around his neck at phillies home games for a few weeks.

somwthing like this

[Guest Edgy DC]

Could you possiblly do a better job casting for the role of "Stupid Young Chump Egged on by His Friends to Run out on the Field."

Look at how reality is dawning on him that (1) what seemed like the best idea only 10 seconds ago was actually very stupid, (2) his friends don't really have his interests at heart, and (3) his dad is going to kill him dead.

[metirish]

LOL....I thnk that about sums up what's going through his head ...

[Guest themetfairy]

What is he carrying? A hot dog?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Edgy DC wrote: Could you possiblly do a better job casting for the role of "Stupid Young Chump Egged on by His Friends to Run out on the Field." Look at how reality is dawning on him that (1) what seemed like the best idea only 10 seconds ago was actually very stupid, (2) his friends don't really have his interests at heart, and (3) his dad is going to kill him dead.

No, actually his Dad is a double-layer douchecake too.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20100504_Tasered_teen_asked_dad_for_OK_to_run_on_field.html

[Guest themetfairy]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Could you possiblly do a better job casting for the role of "Stupid Young Chump Egged on by His Friends to Run out on the Field." Look at how reality is dawning on him that (1) what seemed like the best idea only 10 seconds ago was actually very stupid, (2) his friends don't really have his interests at heart, and (3) his dad is going to kill him dead. No, actually his Dad is a double-layer douchecake too. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20100504_Tasered_teen_asked_dad_for_OK_to_run_on_field.html

I'd love to hear the conversation between the douche dad and his ex-wife when he explained to her that, while under his supervision, their minor son broke the law and got tased in front of thousands of people.

[Frayed Knot]

attgig wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riCu3LJOgmk&feature=player_embedded another view: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqtPUhYdz6M

If that first one is the video from last night it doesn't look like the guy got tased at all.
The cop/security might have been shooting the thing at him but missing or just aiming it with intent but never pulling the trigger, but it looks like the dope just goes down on his own when he realizes his time is up.

I always think it's best if the biggest cop just happens to "trip" on his way to cover the guy and by doing so drops a knee into the back of his ribcage. Makes it tough for the douche to take his bows on the way out if he's trying too hard to catch his breath.

[Guest themetfairy]

Oh - he was swinging a "rally towel" around.

[Willets Point]

Frayed Knot wrote: It depends. If the guy was resisting in some way - other than just being a stupid drunk who is having fun until he's caught and goes quietly - then it's one thing. But tasers occasionally kill people and I prefer cops/security folks didn't pick that as their first option based on the premise that he might do something or because it's easier than chasing him.

This.

[nymr83]

It depends. If the guy was resisting in some way - other than just being a stupid drunk who is having fun until he's caught and goes quietly - then it's one thing. But tasers occasionally kill people and I prefer cops/security folks didn't pick that as their first option based on the premise that he might do something or because it's easier than chasing him.

what would you consider "goes quietly"? remember that clown who slugged a coach? (i think a white sox game?)
running away from the authorities is enough for me, you don't belong on the field and you know it. security/police should not have to give you the benefit of the doubt when you are already trespassing and risk the safety of the teams' personnel or their own safety.
plus, he's a phillies fan, so taze his ass.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Tasing an unarmed unthreatening disrupter running away seems pretty disproportionate.

[nymr83]

he was running around trying to evade security, at what point are YOU ready to taze him?

not after something like this i hope-



Besides Gamboa, an umpire was assaulted in a seperate incident (Jerry was there, coaching the White Sox i think). how many of these wackos do we give the benefit of the doubt to?

When security comes after you, you can a) stop running and do as they say, or accept the consequences, and i think a tazer is a reasonable consequence when you are running away from police.

[Guest Edgy DC]

You're on fire tonight.

he was running around trying to evade security, at what point are YOU ready to taze him?

When he's an actual threat to harm somebody and the taser becomes a necessary risk. He wasn't.

not after something like this i hope-

No, I would not tase him because of something somebody else did.

Besides Gamboa, an umpire was assaulted in a seperate incident (Jerry was there, coaching the White Sox i think). how many of these wackos do we give the benefit of the doubt to?

What does "give the benefit of the doubt to" mean? Assuming a greater threat than is apparent and shooting is wreckless and it gets people killed.

When security comes after you, you can a) stop running and do as they say, or accept the consequences, and i think a tazer is a reasonable consequence when you are running away from police.

Firstly, police and security are certainly not the same thing. This was a cop. Secondly, I think it's a disporporitonate amount of consequences.

The notion that players were under threat after the pursuit was begun is risible, so please don't suggest it again.

[nymr83]

You're on fire tonight.

you must be bringing it out

When he's an actual threat to harm somebody and the taser becomes a necessary risk. He wasn't

i disagree that he wasnt a threat, and i disagree about hte perceived threat some of you seem to be placing on tasers. they are pretty damn safe, see here: http://www.news-medical.net/news/2007/10/09/30945.aspx

No, I would not tase him because of something somebody else did.

i'm sure you know that i was demonstrating that i wouldn't wait until after the guy attacked someone

What does "give the benefit of the doubt to" mean? Assuming a greater threat than is apparent and shooting is wreckless and it gets people killed.

it means he is alreadt breaking the law running on the field and i'm not giing him the benefit of the doubt that he isnt going to hurt someone. you use the word "shooting" here as if in the context of a gun, a taser is not a gun and has rarely if ever killed anyone.
the study i quoted said 2 or 3 serious injuries (1 was an unclear link) out of 1,000. i'd guess there'd be that many if a guy got tackled to the ground by police.
i think the main disagreement here seems to be over the danger inherent in a taser (and thus when its use is appropriate). while groups like amnesty international claim they are more deadly weapons, i can't find any actual study showing this to be the case. the only study i can find is the Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center study quoted in my link above. do you have proof they are more dangerous than that?

[Gwreck]

Nymr83 wrote: do you have proof they are more dangerous than that?

Here's a differing opinion: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/12/05/20081205taser1205.html

Also within that article is a claim that "since 2001, there have been more than 380 deaths following police Taser strikes in the United States and 26 in Canada. Medical examiners have ruled that a Taser was a cause, contributing factor or could not be ruled out in more than 30 of those deaths" which certainly contradicts your claim that a taser has "rarely if ever killed someone."

[Fman99]

Taze him... because he's a Phillies fan. Everyone should have to get tazed just to get into that den of idiocy.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Thanks, Gwreck.

If he was a threat at that time to harm anybody, then I'm a threat, then most every jerk police come into contact with is a threat.

[Frayed Knot]

Nymr83 wrote: It depends. If the guy was resisting in some way - other than just being a stupid drunk who is having fun until he's caught and goes quietly - then it's one thing. But tasers occasionally kill people and I prefer cops/security folks didn't pick that as their first option based on the premise that he might do something or because it's easier than chasing him. what would you consider "goes quietly"? remember that clown who slugged a coach? (i think a white sox game?)

Not that certainly. That guy - a father/son team of drunks actually - went from the stands directly at the coach with obvious menace in mind.

running away from the authorities is enough for me, you don't belong on the field and you know it. security/police should not have to give you the benefit of the doubt when you are already trespassing and risk the safety of the teams' personnel or their own safety. plus, he's a phillies fan, so taze his ass.

It's a judgement call as it usually is with good law enforcement. In this particular case you have a skinny teenager running aimlessly in circles while waving a towel with no attempt or even hint that he was going after a player. In cases like that I'd prefer that going to the taser not be the first option nor be the choice based on not wanting to spend another 15 seconds cornering the guy.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Another douchebag ran onto the field in Philly last night and wasn't tazed. I do hope he's raped in prison

[Guest Edgy DC]

Well, that kicks in the stomache the argument that a public taser shock would be an effective deterrent for the next guy.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

I guess I'm a hard liner, but I say that if an individual runs onto the field the authorities should utilize any non-lethal means necessary to subdue the culprit as expediantly as possible. If a person doesn't want to get tazed, maced, or body slammed and then cuffed and arrested they should stay in their seat like a civil individual. I may be incorrect, but as far as I know, no one has ever been tazed for enjoying the game from their seat.

[Guest Edgy DC]

The thing is (1) Tasers have been shown to be potentially lethal and indeed have been in a disquieting number of cases, and (2) since when is it good practice for police to escalate a non-violent situation by attacking with weapons of any sort?

[Centerfield]

You know what would be a more effective deterrent than tasers? Lifetime ban from all ballparks.

[Gwreck]

I am in favor, but sadly, that's next to impossible to enforce.

[Fman99]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Another douchebag ran onto the field in Philly last night and wasn't tazed. I do hope he's raped in prison

I hope he gets DP'd by a catheter and a Michael Clarke Duncan look alike.

[nymr83]

according to this morning's paper, the crowd chanted "tase him" at the new idiot last night.

Gwreck, you are quoting study that focussed on one particular model of stun gun, also whats up with this?

But since 2001, there have been more than 380 deaths following police Taser strikes in the United States and 26 in Canada. Medical examiners have ruled that a Taser was a cause, contributing factor or could not be ruled out in more than 30 of those deaths

then what happened in the other 350? was the taser ruled out? then why are they even being mentioned?

so we've got 30 deaths in 7 years (article 2008), an unknown number of which (unknown because the article doesnt say and i dont have access to the individual reports) the taser didnt necessarily do anything but "couldn't be ruled out"

this still looks "safe" to me given the number of times tasers get used.

this artcile also focuses on one model, making it generally useless for eveluating anything else