Comments on: Guns, OC, and Tasers, Oh My

By: jimmyb

jimmyb — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 15:53:26 +0000

“If a police officer or a civilian is stunned with a Taser there are a whole array of things that can happen and most of them are very bad…”

Then why should cops have them either? When accused of misuse, the police say they are harmless.
Hmmm.

By: bob r

bob r — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:14:14 +0000

…but that is awful close to the 21 foot rule is someone has a knife.

Seems like the taser might be better than a firearm to defend against this risk: the taser has the potential (ha) to immobilize the the attacker which a firearm may not do.

I’m still sticking with my .45 though.

By: HardCorps

HardCorps — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:13:02 +0000

Right, because everyone who is not moving and not caring a weapon needs to be wrestled to the ground…

By: _Jon

_Jon — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:49:51 +0000

I believe at this blog the proper sub-title is;

“Like you and me, only better”

By: ParatrooperJJ

ParatrooperJJ — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:26:12 +0000

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:16:42 +0000

The community I live in has used stun guns / tasers in 3 separate go rounds in the last 25 years and I assure you they also make it a lot easier to question suspects,a get a quick confession, or just surprise your ex. Not quite up to the brutality of a rubber hose or wiring you up to an old crank phone, but thats progress for ya.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:56:52 +0000

My understanding is police use tasers because it’s easier and safer than wrestling a guy to the ground and cuffing him.

By: HardCorps

HardCorps — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:36:34 +0000

The funny thing about tasers is that police will/can only use them on unarmed people. The taser has a range of 30 feet, but that is awful close to the 21 foot rule is someone has a knife. Also, I doubt most cops could hit a target running away/ parallel to them with a firearm, so it would be considerably more difficult to score an already difficult shot. Just watch any of those taser videos on the net: they always shoot someone who is unarmed and not moving.

btw, it shoots out confetti with serial numbers – i’ll pass…

By: CTD

CTD — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:06:36 +0000

Tasers, too, are just for the “Only Ones.”

By: KCSteve

KCSteve — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:58:52 +0000

pssst!
‘alter’ == change
‘altar’ == table used for rituals.

Not that this has any effect on your fine rant, just a burr sticking up.

By: Muzzle Blast

Muzzle Blast — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:36:40 +0000

Give it a bit of time, it’ll become a “favored criminal weapon” since its easier to rape a victim after a surprise Taser’ing since they’ll be temporarily rendered unable to resist or make substantial noise, etc. It’s also less risky to mug a disabled victim too … just imagine the possibilities.

By: Robb Allen

Robb Allen — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:33:10 +0000

I disagree with you here. You should not own one of these devices unless you are a trained, law enforcement officer.

It took an off duty cop to effectively taser a man holding his baby this week. If you weren’t trained, you might have let the man walk out of a hospital with his own child.

Thank God that off duty cop had training or the baby might not have been dropped on its head and instead been electrocuted along with the father!

By: GeorgeH

GeorgeH — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:13:38 +0000

I have one of the new Tasers on order for a lady friend. I seriously doubt it’s barbs will penetrate a police weight kevlar vest.

By: Joe Mama

Joe Mama — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:49:05 +0000

I thought guns were immobilizing devices too. Hmmm….