Reply #7: Oh stop it. [View All]

[tkmorris]

For me the point is that the police did not HAVE to use what amounted to deadly force in this case, as in so many others that end similarly. They could have called in almost unlimited backup, they could have simply subdued the man with sheer numbers. Instead they chose to use whatever force they felt neccessary to render the man helpless and in the process killed him.

Did the man who died act in such a way that invited our ire? Sure he did. But the police duty in these cases is NOT to judge anyone, it is merely to deliver the suspect to a court where a jury or a judge will decide what level of guilt he has and what the punishment will be. As a society we do not want our police engaged in deciding whether a suspect should be killed or not. They should take every possible precaution to simply apprehend and deliver the person to those who do that.

You wrongly define this attitude as "defending a criminal". It isn't. It is defending the rights of someone who isn't even a criminal yet officially, merely a suspect. I do not hate the police, nor do I fail to appreciate the job they do and the dangers involved.

Tasers should be outlawed. Tasers kill people when administered in less than optimal circumstances, and police cannot know when that will be. If the target has a heart condition, or is elderly, or is on cocaine or other drugs, etc,. applying a taser can be a death sentence. Police need a better means to subdue suspects that does not run the risk of killing them, in effect trying, sentencing, and executing them on the spot.